From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Takuya Yoshikawa Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] kvm: Be courteous to other VMs in overcommitted scenario in PLE handler Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 22:46:36 +0900 Message-ID: <20120921224636.18cccbd6c33b161975f2a8cb@gmail.com> References: <20120921115942.27611.67488.sendpatchset@codeblue> <20120921120019.27611.66093.sendpatchset@codeblue> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Peter Zijlstra , "H. Peter Anvin" , Marcelo Tosatti , Ingo Molnar , Avi Kivity , Rik van Riel , Srikar , "Nikunj A. Dadhania" , KVM , Jiannan Ouyang , chegu vinod , "Andrew M. Theurer" , LKML , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , Gleb Natapov To: Raghavendra K T Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120921120019.27611.66093.sendpatchset@codeblue> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:30:20 +0530 Raghavendra K T wrote: > From: Raghavendra K T > > When PLE handler fails to find a better candidate to yield_to, it > goes back and does spin again. This is acceptable when we do not > have overcommit. > But in overcommitted scenarios (especially when we have large > number of small guests), it is better to yield. > > Reviewed-by: Srikar Dronamraju > Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T > --- > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 4 ++++ > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > index 8323685..713b677 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > @@ -1660,6 +1660,10 @@ void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me) > } > } > } > + /* In overcommitted cases, yield instead of spinning */ > + if (!yielded && rq_nr_running() > 1) > + schedule(); How about doing cond_resched() instead? I'm not sure whether checking more sched stuff in KVM code is a good thing. Takuya