From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] stop_machine: make stop_machine_run more virtualization friendly
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 14:33:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48230137.9090705@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200805081520.38310.borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On kvm I have seen some rare hangs in stop_machine when I used more guest
> cpus than hosts cpus. e.g. 32 guest cpus on 1 host cpu triggered the
> hang quite often. I could also reproduce the problem on a 4 way z/VM host with
> a 64 way guest.
>
I think that's one of those "don't do that then" cases ;)
> It turned out that the guest was consuming all available cpus mostly for
> spinning on scheduler locks like rq->lock. This is expected as the threads are
> calling yield all the time.
> The problem is now, that the host scheduling decisings together with the guest
> scheduling decisions and spinlocks not being fair managed to create an
> interesting scenario similar to a live lock. (Sometimes the hang resolved
> itself after some minutes)
>
I think x86 (at least) is now using ticket locks, which is fair. Which
kernel are you seeing this problem on?
> Changing stop_machine to yield the cpu to the hypervisor when yielding inside
> the guest fixed the problem for me. While I am not completely happy with this
> patch, I think it causes no harm and it really improves the situation for me.
>
> I used cpu_relax for yielding to the hypervisor, does that work on all
> architectures?
>
On x86, cpu_relax is just a "pause" instruction ("rep;nop"). We don't
hook it in paravirt_ops, and while VT/SVM can be used to fault into the
hypervisor on this instruction, I don't know if kvm actually does so.
Either way, it wouldn't work for VMI, Xen or lguest.
J
> p.s.: If you want to reproduce the problem, cpu hotplug and kprobes use
> stop_machine_run and both triggered the problem after some retries.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
>
> ---
> kernel/stop_machine.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> Index: kvm/kernel/stop_machine.c
> ===================================================================
> --- kvm.orig/kernel/stop_machine.c
> +++ kvm/kernel/stop_machine.c
> @@ -62,8 +62,7 @@ static int stopmachine(void *cpu)
> * help our sisters onto their CPUs. */
> if (!prepared && !irqs_disabled)
> yield();
> - else
> - cpu_relax();
> + cpu_relax();
> }
>
> /* Ack: we are exiting. */
> @@ -106,8 +105,10 @@ static int stop_machine(void)
> }
>
> /* Wait for them all to come to life. */
> - while (atomic_read(&stopmachine_thread_ack) != stopmachine_num_threads)
> + while (atomic_read(&stopmachine_thread_ack) != stopmachine_num_threads) {
> yield();
> + cpu_relax();
> + }
>
> /* If some failed, kill them all. */
> if (ret < 0) {
>
> _______________________________________________
> Virtualization mailing list
> Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-08 13:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-08 13:20 [PATCH/RFC] stop_machine: make stop_machine_run more virtualization friendly Christian Borntraeger
2008-05-08 13:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2008-05-08 14:41 ` Christian Borntraeger
2008-05-08 14:58 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-08 16:23 ` Christian Borntraeger
2008-05-09 1:10 ` Rusty Russell
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=48230137.9090705@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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