public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	joao.m.martins@oracle.com, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com,
	rkrcmar@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpuidle-haltpoll: fix up the branch check
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 11:10:25 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bafc1688-02ea-77a4-fb1c-2fe6afa8a7cc@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191101212613.GB20672@amt.cnet>


On 2019/11/2 5:26, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 11:23:59AM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>> Ensure pool time is longer than block_ns, so there is a margin to
>> avoid vCPU get into block state unnecessorily.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/cpuidle/governors/haltpoll.c | 6 +++---
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/haltpoll.c b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/haltpoll.c
>> index 4b00d7a..59eadaf 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/haltpoll.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/haltpoll.c
>> @@ -81,9 +81,9 @@ static void adjust_poll_limit(struct cpuidle_device *dev, unsigned int block_us)
>>   	u64 block_ns = block_us*NSEC_PER_USEC;
>>   
>>   	/* Grow cpu_halt_poll_us if
>> -	 * cpu_halt_poll_us < block_ns < guest_halt_poll_us
>> +	 * cpu_halt_poll_us <= block_ns < guest_halt_poll_us
>>   	 */
>> -	if (block_ns > dev->poll_limit_ns && block_ns <= guest_halt_poll_ns) {
>> +	if (block_ns >= dev->poll_limit_ns && block_ns < guest_halt_poll_ns) {
> 					      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> If block_ns == guest_halt_poll_ns, you won't allow dev->poll_limit_ns to
> grow. Why is that?

Maybe I'm too strict here. My understanding is: if block_ns = guest_halt_poll_ns,
dev->poll_limit_ns will grow to guest_halt_poll_ns, then block_ns = dev->poll_limit_ns,
there is not a margin to ensure poll time is enough to cover the equal block time.
In this case, shrinking may be a better choice?

>
>> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static void adjust_poll_limit(struct cpuidle_device *dev, unsigned int block_us)
>>   			val = guest_halt_poll_ns;
>>   
>>   		dev->poll_limit_ns = val;
>> -	} else if (block_ns > guest_halt_poll_ns &&
>> +	} else if (block_ns >= guest_halt_poll_ns &&
>>   		   guest_halt_poll_allow_shrink) {
>>   		unsigned int shrink = guest_halt_poll_shrink;
> And here you shrink if block_ns == guest_halt_poll_ns. Not sure
> why that makes sense either.

See above explanation.

Zhenzhong


  reply	other threads:[~2019-11-04  3:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-26  3:23 [PATCH 0/5] misc fixes on halt-poll code both KVM and guest Zhenzhong Duan
2019-10-26  3:23 ` [PATCH 1/5] KVM: simplify branch check in host poll code Zhenzhong Duan
2019-11-01 21:03   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2019-11-04  3:49     ` Zhenzhong Duan
2019-10-26  3:23 ` [PATCH 2/5] KVM: add a check to ensure grow start value is nonzero Zhenzhong Duan
2019-11-11 13:49   ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-26  3:23 ` [PATCH 3/5] KVM: ensure pool time is longer than block_ns Zhenzhong Duan
2019-11-01 21:16   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2019-11-11 13:53     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-11-12 12:14       ` Zhenzhong Duan
2019-10-26  3:23 ` [PATCH 4/5] cpuidle-haltpoll: add a check to ensure grow start value is nonzero Zhenzhong Duan
2019-11-01 21:19   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2019-11-04  2:56     ` Zhenzhong Duan
2019-11-11 13:54       ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-26  3:23 ` [PATCH 5/5] cpuidle-haltpoll: fix up the branch check Zhenzhong Duan
2019-11-01 21:26   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2019-11-04  3:10     ` Zhenzhong Duan [this message]
2019-11-04 15:01       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2019-11-05  6:49         ` Zhenzhong Duan

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=bafc1688-02ea-77a4-fb1c-2fe6afa8a7cc@oracle.com \
    --to=zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com \
    --cc=joao.m.martins@oracle.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.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