From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
To: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, pasic@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: s390: Add opportunistic floating IRQ injection
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 12:04:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2988db19-755c-445a-8226-95e99904a232@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260820121546.24694-4-frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Am 20.08.26 um 14:12 schrieb Janosch Frank:
> Try to distribute floating IRQs which haven't been taken by a VCPU yet
> to sleeping VCPUs. This lowers the risk of floating IRQs not being
> delivered.
I think this could be too expensive in the innermost loop.
As an alternative:
what about actually adding a check in handle wait that triggers if we are going
to sleep despite pending interrupts.>
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
> arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 3 +++
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index b4182ca4435f..1d62bdd7aca5 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -467,6 +467,7 @@ struct kvm_vm_stat {
> u64 gmap_shadow_r3_entry;
> u64 gmap_shadow_sg_entry;
> u64 gmap_shadow_pg_entry;
> + u64 inject_redist;
> };
>
> struct kvm_arch_memory_slot {
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c b/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
> index b3e4bfeacff2..54f20347f553 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/interrupt.c
> @@ -367,6 +367,37 @@ static unsigned long deliverable_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> return active_mask;
> }
>
> +void distribute_float_irqs(struct kvm *kvm)
> +{
> + struct kvm_vcpu *dst_vcpu;
> + int sigcpu, online_vcpus;
> +
> + if (!READ_ONCE(kvm->arch.float_int.pending_irqs))
> + return;
> +
> + online_vcpus = atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus);
> +
> + /*
> + * Not too worried about synchronization for idle_mask. We
> + * might burn too many cycles but apart from that waking a
> + * vcpu is not harmful.
> + */
> + sigcpu = find_first_bit(kvm->arch.idle_mask, online_vcpus);
> + /* Well nobody's sleeping so someone will likely take the IRQ soon */
> + if (sigcpu == online_vcpus)
> + return;
> +
> + do {
> + dst_vcpu = kvm_get_vcpu(kvm, sigcpu);
> + if (deliverable_irqs(dst_vcpu)) {
> + kvm->stat.inject_redist++;
> + kvm_s390_vcpu_wakeup(dst_vcpu);
> + break;
> + }
> + sigcpu = find_next_bit(kvm->arch.idle_mask, online_vcpus, ++sigcpu);
> + } while (sigcpu < online_vcpus);
> +}
> +
> static void __set_cpu_idle(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> kvm_s390_set_cpuflags(vcpu, CPUSTAT_WAIT);
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index 518a69c55e85..d6d46688d980 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ const struct kvm_stats_desc kvm_vm_stats_desc[] = {
> STATS_DESC_COUNTER(VM, gmap_shadow_r3_entry),
> STATS_DESC_COUNTER(VM, gmap_shadow_sg_entry),
> STATS_DESC_COUNTER(VM, gmap_shadow_pg_entry),
> + STATS_DESC_COUNTER(VM, inject_redist),
> };
>
> const struct kvm_stats_header kvm_vm_stats_header = {
> @@ -4572,6 +4573,8 @@ static int vcpu_pre_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> rc = kvm_s390_deliver_pending_interrupts(vcpu);
> if (rc || guestdbg_exit_pending(vcpu))
> return rc;
> +
> + distribute_float_irqs(vcpu->kvm);
> }
>
> rc = kvm_s390_handle_requests(vcpu);
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h
> index 8e886bcef4a0..7115a8f5b188 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.h
> @@ -376,6 +376,7 @@ int __must_check kvm_s390_deliver_pending_interrupts(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> void kvm_s390_clear_local_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> void kvm_s390_clear_float_irqs(struct kvm *kvm);
> void kvm_s390_pv_sclp_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> +void distribute_float_irqs(struct kvm *kvm);
> int __must_check kvm_s390_inject_vm(struct kvm *kvm,
> struct kvm_s390_interrupt *s390int,
> struct kvm_s390_interrupt_info *inti);
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-25 10:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-20 12:12 [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM: s390: Improve floating IRQ injection behavior Janosch Frank
2026-08-20 12:12 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] " Janosch Frank
2026-08-20 12:31 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-25 9:26 ` Christian Borntraeger
2026-09-25 13:45 ` Janosch Frank
2026-09-25 13:48 ` Christian Borntraeger
2026-08-20 12:12 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM: s390: Kick PV cpus at the right time for service irqs Janosch Frank
2026-08-20 12:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-25 9:35 ` Christian Borntraeger
2026-09-25 10:11 ` Christian Borntraeger
2026-08-20 12:12 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: s390: Add opportunistic floating IRQ injection Janosch Frank
2026-08-20 12:27 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-25 10:04 ` Christian Borntraeger [this message]
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=2988db19-755c-445a-8226-95e99904a232@linux.ibm.com \
--to=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox