From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 1/9] KVM: s390: optimize detection of started
 vcpus
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 14:42:47 +0200
Message-ID: <20170829144247.5b0644dc.cohuck@redhat.com>
References: <20170821203530.9266-1-rkrcmar@redhat.com>
        <20170821203530.9266-2-rkrcmar@redhat.com>
        <67a8b09c-3e7a-943d-8684-f9ad6e70514b@redhat.com>
        <20170829132342.1ef25500.cohuck@redhat.com>
        <d63ceb80-bdf7-0a24-a4ac-3265b7528a60@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Cc: Radim =?UTF-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@linux-mips.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Christoffer Dall <cdall@linaro.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
        James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
        Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <d63ceb80-bdf7-0a24-a4ac-3265b7528a60@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 14:05:40 +0200
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 29.08.2017 13:23, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Aug 2017 13:31:27 +0200
> > David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 21.08.2017 22:35, Radim Krčmář wrote:  
> >>> We can add a variable instead of scanning all online VCPUs to know how
> >>> many are started.  We can't trivially tell which VCPU is the last one,
> >>> though.    
> >>
> >> You could keep the started vcpus in a list. Then you might drop unsigned
> >> started_vcpus;
> >>
> >> No started vcpus: Start pointer NULL
> >> Single started vcpu: Only one element in the list (easy to check)  
> >>> 1 started vcpus: More than one element int he list (easy to check)    
> > 
> > I'm not sure the added complication of keeping a list buys us much
> > here: We only have the "look for the last vcpu not stopped" operation
> > for the 2->1 transition.
> >   
> 
> That is wrong, we also have to know the last remaining (started) VCPU.
> For that, right now we have to iterate over all VCPUs.

Yes, but that's only for the 2->1 transition... and all in all that is
still much better that before.

> 
> There shouldn't be much complexity. We already perform changes under a
> lock, so it is as simple as adding/removing from the list.
> 
> Detecting the transitions boils down to looking at two pointers.

Having a private vcpu list feels a bit wrong... and I don't really see
much benefit.