From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Daniel J Blueman <daniel@numascale.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 16/16] unfair qspinlock: a queue based unfair lock
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 09:16:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55267BA8.9060009@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150409070146.GL27490@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 04/09/2015 03:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 02:32:19PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> For a virtual guest with the qspinlock patch, a simple unfair byte lock
>> will be used if PV spinlock is not configured in or the hypervisor
>> isn't either KVM or Xen. The byte lock works fine with small guest
>> of just a few vCPUs. On a much larger guest, however, byte lock can
>> have serious performance problem.
>
> Who cares?
There are some people out there running guests with dozens
of vCPUs. If the code exists to make those setups run better,
is there a good reason not to use it?
Having said that, only KVM and Xen seem to support very
large guests, and PV spinlock is available there.
I believe both VMware and Hyperv have a 32 VCPU limit, anyway.
--
All rights reversed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-09 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-08 18:32 [PATCH v15 16/16] unfair qspinlock: a queue based unfair lock Waiman Long
2015-04-08 18:32 ` Waiman Long
2015-04-09 7:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-09 13:16 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2015-04-09 14:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-09 14:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-09 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2015-04-09 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2015-04-09 21:52 ` Waiman Long
2015-04-09 21:52 ` Waiman Long
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=55267BA8.9060009@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=daniel@numascale.com \
--cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=doug.hatch@hp.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paolo.bonzini@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).