All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Longpeng (Mike)" <longpeng2@huawei.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: <pbonzini@redhat.com>, <rkrcmar@redhat.com>, <agraf@suse.com>,
	<borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	<christoffer.dall@linaro.org>, <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	<james.hogan@imgtec.com>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <weidong.huang@huawei.com>,
	<arei.gonglei@huawei.com>, <wangxinxin.wang@huawei.com>,
	<longpeng.mike@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] KVM: optimize the kvm_vcpu_on_spin
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 20:08:14 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <597F1DAE.4020809@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bcbdafa9-349f-345e-dde1-28bfa1cf5826@redhat.com>

Hi David,

On 2017/7/31 19:31, David Hildenbrand wrote:

> [no idea if this change makes sense (and especially if it has any bad
> side effects), do you have performance numbers? I'll just have a look at
> the general structure of the patch in the meanwhile]
> 

I haven't any test results yet, could you give me some suggestion about what
benchmarks are suitable ?

>> +bool kvm_arch_vcpu_spin_kernmode(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> 
> kvm_arch_vcpu_in_kernel() ?
> 

Um...yes, I'll correct this.

>> +{
>> +	return kvm_x86_ops->get_cpl(vcpu) == 0;
>> +}
>> +
>>  int kvm_arch_vcpu_should_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  {
>>  	return kvm_vcpu_exiting_guest_mode(vcpu) == IN_GUEST_MODE;
>> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> index 648b34c..f8f0d74 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -272,6 +272,9 @@ struct kvm_vcpu {
>>  	} spin_loop;
>>  #endif
>>  	bool preempted;
>> +	/* If vcpu is in kernel-mode when preempted */
>> +	bool in_kernmode;
>> +
> 
> Why do you have to store that ...
> 

> [...]> +	me->in_kernmode = kvm_arch_vcpu_spin_kernmode(me);
>>  	kvm_vcpu_set_in_spin_loop(me, true);
>>  	/*
>>  	 * We boost the priority of a VCPU that is runnable but not
>> @@ -2351,6 +2353,8 @@ void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
>>  				continue;
>>  			if (swait_active(&vcpu->wq) && !kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(vcpu))
>>  				continue;
>> +			if (me->in_kernmode && !vcpu->in_kernmode)
> 
> Wouldn't it be easier to simply have
> 
> in_kernel = kvm_arch_vcpu_in_kernel(me);
> ...
> if (in_kernel && !kvm_arch_vcpu_in_kernel(vcpu))
> ...
> 

I'm not sure whether the operation of get the vcpu's priority-level is
expensive on all architectures, so I record it in kvm_sched_out() for
minimal the extra cycles cost in kvm_vcpu_on_spin().

>> +				continue;
>>  			if (!kvm_vcpu_eligible_for_directed_yield(vcpu))
>>  				continue;
>>  
>> @@ -4009,8 +4013,11 @@ static void kvm_sched_out(struct preempt_notifier *pn,
>>  {
>>  	struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = preempt_notifier_to_vcpu(pn);
>>  
>> -	if (current->state == TASK_RUNNING)
>> +	if (current->state == TASK_RUNNING) {
>>  		vcpu->preempted = true;
>> +		vcpu->in_kernmode = kvm_arch_vcpu_spin_kernmode(vcpu);
>> +	}
>> +
> 
> so you don't have to do this change, too.
> 
>>  	kvm_arch_vcpu_put(vcpu);
>>  }
>>  
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Regards,
Longpeng(Mike)

  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-31 12:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-29  6:22 [RFC] KVM: optimize the kvm_vcpu_on_spin Longpeng(Mike)
2017-07-31 11:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-07-31 12:08   ` Longpeng (Mike) [this message]
2017-07-31 12:27     ` David Hildenbrand
2017-07-31 13:20       ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-08-01  3:26         ` Longpeng (Mike)
2017-08-01  8:32           ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-07-31 12:31     ` Cornelia Huck
2017-07-31 13:01       ` Longpeng (Mike)
2017-07-31 13:22 ` Christoffer Dall
2017-07-31 17:32   ` David Hildenbrand
2017-08-01  6:51     ` Cornelia Huck
2017-08-01  2:24   ` Longpeng (Mike)
2017-07-31 13:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-07-31 14:23   ` Paolo Bonzini

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=597F1DAE.4020809@huawei.com \
    --to=longpeng2@huawei.com \
    --cc=agraf@suse.com \
    --cc=arei.gonglei@huawei.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=christoffer.dall@linaro.org \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=longpeng.mike@gmail.com \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    --cc=wangxinxin.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=weidong.huang@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.