public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>
Cc: kvm-devel <kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qemu-kvm: Consolidate kvm_eat_signals
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 09:31:46 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <482854D2.50100@codemonkey.ws> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48283071.5030600@qumranet.com>

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>   
>>> Given that with the iothread we spend very little time processing
>>> signals in vcpu threads, maybe it's better to drop the loop completely. 
>>> The common case is zero or one pending signals.  The uncommon case of
>>> two or more pending signals will be handled by the KVM_RUN ioctl
>>> returning immediately with -EINTR (i.e. in the outer loop).
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
>> You mean
>>
>> static void kvm_main_loop_wait(CPUState *env, int timeout)
>> {
>>     pthread_mutex_unlock(&qemu_mutex);
>>     kvm_eat_signal(env, timeout);
>>     pthread_mutex_lock(&qemu_mutex);
>>     cpu_single_env = env;
>>
>>     vcpu_info[env->cpu_index].signalled = 0;
>> }
>>
>> ?
>>   
>>     
>
> Yes.  The loop was a (perhaps premature) optimization that is now 
> totally unnecessary, unless I'm missing something quite large.
>   

It used to be that kvm_eat_signal() selected after consuming as many 
signals as possible while only sleeping once.  That's why there's a 
combination of sleeping and polling.

Now the VCPU threads never select so the whole loop can be simplified to 
a single sigtimedwait() that always blocks.

In reality, I don't think sigtimedwait() is really needed/useful for 
VCPUs anymore.  We only use it to catch SIG_IPI and we only use SIG_IPI 
to break out of sleeping.  I don't see any reason why we couldn't switch 
over to using a file descriptor for notification (or a pthread 
condition).  In the very least, we could just select() on nothing and 
allow SIG_IPI to break us out of the select.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Oh.  There used to be a bug where we didn't check for a pending signal 
> before the first guest entry, so this would add a lot of latency 
> (effectively making the bug window much larger).  That was only closed 
> in 2.6.24 (by 7e66f350).
>
>   


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone

  reply	other threads:[~2008-05-12 14:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-12 10:50 [PATCH] qemu-kvm: Consolidate kvm_eat_signals Jan Kiszka
2008-05-12 11:33 ` Avi Kivity
2008-05-12 11:42   ` Jan Kiszka
2008-05-12 11:56     ` Avi Kivity
2008-05-12 14:31       ` Anthony Liguori [this message]
2008-05-12 14:42         ` Avi Kivity
2008-05-12 15:11           ` Anthony Liguori

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=482854D2.50100@codemonkey.ws \
    --to=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
    --cc=avi@qumranet.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@web.de \
    --cc=kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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