linux-s390.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: S390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@hp.com>,
	"Andrew M. Theurer" <habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 <x86@kernel.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
	linux390@de.ibm.com,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@gmail.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@amd.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC V2 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 01:00:57 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120710193056.16440.40112.sendpatchset@codeblue> (raw)


Currently Pause Looop Exit (PLE) handler is doing directed yield to a
random VCPU on PL exit. Though we already have filtering while choosing
the candidate to yield_to, we can do better.

Problem is, for large vcpu guests, we have more probability of yielding
to a bad vcpu. We are not able to prevent directed yield to same guy who
has done PL exit recently, who perhaps spins again and wastes CPU.

Fix that by keeping track of who has done PL exit. So The Algorithm in series
give chance to a VCPU which has:

 (a) Not done PLE exit at all (probably he is preempted lock-holder)

 (b) VCPU skipped in last iteration because it did PL exit, and probably
 has become eligible now (next eligible lock holder)

Future enhancemnets:
  (1) Currently we have a boolean to decide on eligibility of vcpu. It
    would be nice if I get feedback on guest (>32 vcpu) whether we can
    improve better with integer counter. (with counter = say f(log n )).
  
  (2) We have not considered system load during iteration of vcpu. With
   that information we can limit the scan and also decide whether schedule()
   is better. [ I am able to use #kicked vcpus to decide on this But may
   be there are better ideas like information from global loadavg.]

  (3) We can exploit this further with PV patches since it also knows about
   next eligible lock-holder.

Changes since V1:
 - Add more documentation for structure and algorithm and Rename
   plo ==> ple (Rik).
 - change dy_eligible initial value to false. (otherwise very first directed
    yield will not be skipped. (Nikunj)
 - fixup signoff/from issue

Summary: There is a very good improvement for moderate / no overcommit scenario
 for kvm based guest on PLE machine (which is difficult ;) ).
 
       kernbench    sysbench    ebizzy
 1x    28 %          -0.04 %     105 %    
 2x    7 %            0.83 %      26 %

---
 Link for V1: (It also has result)
  https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/9/32

 Raghavendra K T (2):
   kvm vcpu: Note down pause loop exit
   kvm PLE handler: Choose better candidate for directed yield

 arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h |    5 +++++
 arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h  |   13 ++++++++++++-
 arch/x86/kvm/svm.c               |    1 +
 arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c               |    1 +
 arch/x86/kvm/x86.c               |   34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 virt/kvm/kvm_main.c              |    3 +++
 6 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

             reply	other threads:[~2012-07-10 19:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-10 19:30 Raghavendra K T [this message]
2012-07-10 19:31 ` [PATCH RFC V2 1/2] kvm vcpu: Note down pause loop exit Raghavendra K T
2012-07-10 19:40   ` Rik van Riel
2012-07-10 19:31 ` [PATCH RFC V2 2/2] kvm PLE handler: Choose better candidate for directed yield Raghavendra K T
2012-07-10 19:40   ` Rik van Riel
2012-07-10 20:50   ` Ingo Molnar
2012-07-11  3:00     ` Raghavendra K T

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=20120710193056.16440.40112.sendpatchset@codeblue \
    --to=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
    --cc=cotte@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=joerg.roedel@amd.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=srivatsa.vaddagiri@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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).