From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>
Cc: mtosatti@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1 v2] KVM: Reduce mmu_lock contention during dirty logging by cond_resched()
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 18:20:37 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F9D5C45.3070801@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120430001330.00ae231245771e482ec9977a@gmail.com>
On 04/29/2012 06:13 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 18:00:03 +0300
> Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > > After your work, 8192 in my patch may better be lowered a bit.
> > >
> >
> > Why not remove it altogether? Just change it to cond_resched_lock().
>
> Two concerns:
>
> - too many checks may slow down GET_DIRTY_LOG.
Yes. My expectation is that it's okay. If there is no contention, then
the lock cache line will be local, and the check is cheap. If there is
contention, then we need to drop it.
> - cond_resched_lock() uses spin_needbreak(), and I am not sure if
> this still does rescheduling for alleviating mmu_lock contention
> without CONFIG_PREEMPT.
IMO that's a feature. If kernel policy is not to lockbreak when
!CONFIG_PREEMPT, then we should follow it, whether it's the right thing
or not. If it's the wrong thing, change it in the kernel proper.
> I need to read the code a bit more.
>
while (1)
need_to_read_the_code_a_bit_more();
unfortunately. I keep finding new things in there, including stuff I
wrote myself.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-29 15:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-28 10:05 [PATCH 0/1 v2] KVM: Alleviate mmu_lock contention during dirty logging Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-28 10:07 ` [PATCH 1/1 v2] KVM: Reduce mmu_lock contention during dirty logging by cond_resched() Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-29 11:27 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-29 12:17 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-29 12:59 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-29 14:24 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-29 14:39 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-29 14:55 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-29 15:00 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-29 15:13 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-29 15:20 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2012-04-30 14:06 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-05-01 3:04 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-05-01 13:14 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-05-01 3:07 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-05-02 11:24 ` Heavy memory_region_get_dirty() -- Re: [PATCH 0/1 v2] KVM: Alleviate mmu_lock contention during dirty logging Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-05-02 11:33 ` Avi Kivity
2012-05-02 14:20 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
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=4F9D5C45.3070801@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com \
--cc=yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp \
/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