linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Raghavendra K T)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: KVM: let other tasks run when hitting WFE
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:27:58 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51ED3A66.4050407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMJs5B8Sg1MPHPsRV75mmagnYxkhzA0MKWVkwW2y0WdDVWTSxQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 07/22/2013 06:21 PM, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> On 22 July 2013 10:53, Raghavendra KT <raghavendra.kt.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> wrote:
>>> So far, when a guest executes WFE (like when waiting for a spinlock
>>> to become unlocked), we don't do a thing and let it run uninterrupted.
>>>
>>> Another option is to trap a blocking WFE and offer the opportunity
>>> to the scheduler to switch to another task, potentially giving the
>>> vcpu holding the spinlock a chance to run sooner.
>>>
>>
>> Idea looks to be correct from my experiments on x86. It does bring some
>> percentage of benefits in overcommitted guests. Infact,
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/22/41 tries to do the same thing for x86.
>> (this results in using ple handler heuristics in vcpu_block pach).
>
> What about the adverse effect in the non-overcommitted case?
>

Ideally is should fail to schedule any other task and comeback to halt
loop. This should not hurt AFAICS. But I agree that, numbers needed to
support this argument.

For x86, I had seen no side effects with the experiments.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-07-22 13:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-19 13:53 [PATCH 0/4] KVM/arm64 fixes for 3.11 Marc Zyngier
2013-07-19 13:53 ` [PATCH 1/4] arm64: KVM: perform save/restore of PAR_EL1 Marc Zyngier
2013-07-20 21:51   ` Christoffer Dall
2013-07-19 13:53 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: KVM: add missing dsb before invalidating Stage-2 TLBs Marc Zyngier
2013-07-19 14:32   ` Will Deacon
2013-07-19 14:53     ` Marc Zyngier
2013-07-19 13:53 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64: KVM: let other tasks run when hitting WFE Marc Zyngier
2013-07-19 14:25   ` Will Deacon
2013-07-19 14:29     ` Marc Zyngier
2013-07-20 22:04   ` Christoffer Dall
2013-07-22  7:36   ` Gleb Natapov
2013-07-22  8:53   ` Raghavendra KT
2013-07-22 12:51     ` Christoffer Dall
2013-07-22 13:01       ` Will Deacon
2013-07-22 13:57       ` Raghavendra K T [this message]
2013-07-28 20:55         ` Christoffer Dall
2013-07-29  7:35           ` Raghavendra K T
2013-07-23 10:41       ` Catalin Marinas
2013-07-23 16:04         ` Will Deacon
2013-07-19 13:53 ` [PATCH 4/4] arm64: KVM: remove __kvm_hyp_code_{start,end} from hyp.S Marc Zyngier
2013-07-22  7:36   ` Gleb Natapov

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=51ED3A66.4050407@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.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).