From: drjones@redhat.com (Andrew Jones)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: KVM: Increase max VCPUs per-Guest to 8
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 14:36:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130914123656.GD2596@hawk.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a4061dc01decc669fcdfaffeb2b2ed1@www.loen.fr>
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 01:13:59PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2013-09-14 12:58, Andrew Jones wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:46:59PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >>On 11/09/13 14:02, Anup Patel wrote:
> >>> Current max VCPUs per-Guest is set to 4 which is preventing
> >>> us from creating a Guest (or VM) with 8 VCPUs on Host (e.g.
> >>> X-Gene Storm SOC) with 8 Host CPUs.
> >>>
> >>> The correct value of max VCPUs per-Guest should be same as
> >>> the max CPUs supported by GICv2 which is 8 hence this patch
> >>> increases KVM_MAX_VCPUS to 8.
> >>
> >>If anything, please make it configurable just like we have on
> >>32bit. No
> >>reason to impose the extra overhead on everyone.
> >
> >What type of overhead are we talking about? Memory, right? as
>
> Memory indeed.
>
> >kvm_for_each_vcpu is almost always used when iterating. But Anup
> >says in
> >his v2 of this patch "can make things slower". If it's memory,
> >then is so
> >much consumed by each vcpu that we shouldn't always set KVM_MAX_VCPUS
>
> Not only. See how the GIC emulation also has per-VCPU data, and this
> results in potentially huge data structures. I have plans to address
> this in the future though.
>
> >to at least the highest number that current hardware supports?
> >Particularly
> >for aarch64 I think we should always be considering multi-platform
> >with the
> >kernel configs.
>
> What do you mean by multiplatform? This constant has nothing to do
> with being multiplatform, and the initial commit message was quite
> misleading in this respect. You can perfectly have 8 VCPUs on a
> single CPU host, and nothing so far impacts multiplatform.
I meant compile the kernel once, but still have it useful on multiple
hosts (some with 4 cpus, some with 8...). Of course with config option
that's still possible, just compile with CONFIG_KVM_MAX_VCPUS=8. So I
guess this is really more of a debate about what the default should be.
Considering the GIC code may be a bit of an over-consumer at the moment
and 8-cpu hosts may not be that widely deployed, then maybe 4 is the
better default right now?
drew
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-14 12:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-11 13:02 [PATCH] arm64: KVM: Increase max VCPUs per-Guest to 8 Anup Patel
2013-09-13 12:46 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-09-14 8:51 ` Andrew Jones
2013-09-14 11:58 ` Andrew Jones
2013-09-14 12:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-09-14 12:36 ` Andrew Jones [this message]
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=20130914123656.GD2596@hawk.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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).