From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Xen Devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>,
konrad.wilk@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V5 00/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:02:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E986B2B.60803@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111014141701.GA2433@redhat.com>
On 10/14/2011 07:17 AM, Jason Baron wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 09:44:48AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> pvops is basically a collection of ordinary _ops structures full of
>> function pointers, but it has a layer of patching to help optimise it.
>> In the common case, this just replaces an indirect call with a direct
>> one, but in some special cases it can inline code. This is used for
>> small, extremely performance-critical things like cli/sti, but it
>> awkward to use in general because you have to specify the inlined code
>> as a parameterless asm.
>>
> I haven't look at the pvops patching (probably should), but I was
> wondering if jump labels could be used for it? Or is there something
> that the pvops patching is doing that jump labels can't handle?
Jump labels are essentially binary: you can use path A or path B. pvops
are multiway: there's no limit to the number of potential number of
paravirtualized hypervisor implementations. At the moment we have 4:
native, Xen, KVM and lguest.
As I said, pvops patching is very general since it allows a particular
op site to be either patched with a direct call/jump to the target code,
or have code inserted inline at the site. In fact, it probably wouldn't
take very much to allow it to implement jump labels.
And the pvops patching mechanism is certainly general to any *ops style
structure which is initialized once (or rarely) and could be optimised.
LSM, perhaps?
>> Jump_labels is basically an efficient way of doing conditionals
>> predicated on rarely-changed booleans - so it's similar to pvops in that
>> it is effectively a very ordinary C construct optimised by dynamic code
>> patching.
>>
> Another thing is that it can be changed at run-time...Can pvops be
> adjusted at run-time as opposed to just boot-time?
No. In general that wouldn't really make sense, because once you've
booted on one hypervisor you're stuck there (though hypothetically you
could consider migration between machines with different hypervisors).
In some cases it might make sense though, such as switching on PV
ticketlocks if the host system becomes overcommitted, but leaving the
native ticketlocks enabled if not.
J
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-14 17:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-13 0:51 [PATCH RFC V5 00/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 01/11] x86/spinlock: replace pv spinlocks with pv ticketlocks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 02/11] x86/ticketlock: don't inline _spin_unlock when using paravirt spinlocks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 03/11] x86/ticketlock: collapse a layer of functions Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 04/11] xen: defer spinlock setup until boot CPU setup Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 05/11] xen/pvticketlock: Xen implementation for PV ticket locks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 06/11] xen/pvticketlocks: add xen_nopvspin parameter to disable xen pv ticketlocks Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 07/11] x86/pvticketlock: use callee-save for lock_spinning Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 08/11] x86/pvticketlock: when paravirtualizing ticket locks, increment by 2 Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 09/11] x86/ticketlock: add slowpath logic Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 10/11] xen/pvticketlock: allow interrupts to be enabled while blocking Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 0:51 ` [PATCH RFC V5 11/11] xen: enable PV ticketlocks on HVM Xen Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-13 10:54 ` [PATCH RFC V5 00/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks Peter Zijlstra
2011-10-13 16:44 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-14 14:17 ` Jason Baron
2011-10-14 17:02 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2011-10-14 18:35 ` Jason Baron
2011-10-14 18:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-10-14 18:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-14 19:02 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-17 14:58 ` Jason Baron
2011-10-14 18:37 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-10-14 19:10 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2011-10-14 19:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-10-17 16:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=4E986B2B.60803@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jbaron@redhat.com \
--cc=jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).