From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
gleb@redhat.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] apic: eoi optimization support
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 13:40:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120507114001.GA15186@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120507105910.GA18943@redhat.com>
* Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 12:35:12PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > Michael S. Tsirkin (5):
> > > apic: fix typo EIO_ACK -> EOI_ACK and document
> > > apic: use symbolic APIC_EOI_ACK
> > > x86: add apic->eoi_write callback
> > > x86: eoi micro-optimization
> > > kvm_para: guest side for eoi avoidance
> > >
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h | 22 ++++++++++++--
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/apicdef.h | 2 +-
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h | 6 ++-
> > > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h | 2 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_flat_64.c | 2 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_noop.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/bigsmp_32.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/es7000_32.c | 2 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/numaq_32.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/probe_32.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/summit_32.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_cluster.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_phys.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_uv_x.c | 1 +
> > > arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > arch/x86/platform/visws/visws_quirks.c | 2 +-
> > > 17 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > No objections from the x86 side.
>
> Is kvm.git a good tree to merge this through?
Fine to me, but I haven't checked how widely it conflicts with
existing bits: by the looks of it most of the linecount is on
the core x86 side, while the kvm change is well concentrated.
> > In terms of advantages, could you please create perf stat
> > runs that counts the number of MMIOs or so? That should show
> > a pretty obvious improvement - and that is enough as proof,
> > no need to try to reproduce the performance win in a noisy
> > benchmark.
>
> You mean with kvm PV, right? On real hardware the
> micro-optimization removes branches and maybe cache-misses but
> I don't see why would it reduce MMIOs.
Yeah, on KVM. On real hw I doubt it's measurable.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-07 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-23 14:03 [PATCH RFC 0/5] apic: eoi optimization support Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-04-23 14:04 ` [PATCH RFC 1/5] apic: fix typo EIO_ACK -> EOI_ACK and document Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-04-23 14:04 ` [PATCH RFC 2/5] apic: use symbolic APIC_EOI_ACK Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-04-23 14:04 ` [PATCH RFC 3/5] x86: add apic->eoi_write callback Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-04-23 14:04 ` [PATCH RFC 4/5] x86: eoi micro-optimization Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-04-23 14:04 ` [PATCH RFC dontapply 5/5] kvm_para: guest side for eoi avoidance Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-04-24 6:50 ` Gleb Natapov
2012-04-24 6:58 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-04-24 7:07 ` Gleb Natapov
2012-05-08 15:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-05-08 15:28 ` Gleb Natapov
2012-05-08 15:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-08 16:32 ` Gleb Natapov
2012-05-08 16:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-05-08 18:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-08 19:36 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-05-07 10:35 ` [PATCH RFC 0/5] apic: eoi optimization support Ingo Molnar
2012-05-07 10:59 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-05-07 11:40 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2012-05-07 11:47 ` Avi Kivity
2012-05-07 11:57 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20120507114001.GA15186@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).