linux-s390.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
To: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Srikar <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	S390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, 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: Re: [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:36:40 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120720173640.GA22659@amt.cnet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120718133717.5321.71347.sendpatchset@codeblue.in.ibm.com>

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 07:07:17PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> 
> Currently Pause Loop Exit (PLE) handler is doing directed yield to a
> random vcpu on pl-exit. We already have filtering while choosing
> the candidate to yield_to. This change adds more checks while choosing
> a candidate to yield_to.
> 
> On a large vcpu guests, there is a high probability of
> yielding to the same vcpu who had recently done a pause-loop exit. 
> Such a yield can lead to the vcpu spinning again.
> 
> The patchset keeps track of the pause loop exit and gives chance to a
> vcpu which has:
> 
>  (a) Not done pause loop exit at all (probably he is preempted lock-holder)
> 
>  (b) vcpu skipped in last iteration because it did pause loop exit, and
>  probably has become eligible now (next eligible lock holder)
> 
> This concept also helps in cpu relax interception cases which use same handler.
> 
> Changes since V4:
>  - Naming Change (Avi):
>   struct ple ==> struct spin_loop
>   cpu_relax_intercepted ==> in_spin_loop
>   vcpu_check_and_update_eligible ==> vcpu_eligible_for_directed_yield
>  - mark vcpu in spinloop as not eligible to avoid influence of previous exit
> 
> Changes since V3:
>  - arch specific fix/changes (Christian)
> 
> Changes since v2:
>  - Move ple structure to common code (Avi)
>  - rename pause_loop_exited to cpu_relax_intercepted (Avi)
>  - add config HAVE_KVM_CPU_RELAX_INTERCEPT (Avi)
>  - Drop superfluous curly braces (Ingo)
> 
> 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
> 
> Future enhancements:
>   (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.
> 
> Summary: There is a very good improvement for kvm based guest on PLE machine.
> The V5 has huge improvement for kbench.
> 
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>    base_rik    stdev       patched      stdev       %improve
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>               kernbench (time in sec lesser is better)
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>  1x    49.2300     1.0171    22.6842     0.3073    117.0233 %
>  2x    91.9358     1.7768    53.9608     1.0154    70.37516 %
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
> 
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>               ebizzy (records/sec more is better)
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>  1x  1129.2500    28.6793    2125.6250    32.8239    88.23334 %
>  2x  1892.3750    75.1112    2377.1250   181.6822    25.61596 %
> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
> 
> Note: The patches are tested on x86.
> 
>  Links
>   V4: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/16/80
>   V3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/12/437
>   V2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/10/392
>   V1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/9/32
> 
>  Raghavendra K T (3):
>    config: Add config to support ple or cpu relax optimzation 
>    kvm : Note down when cpu relax intercepted or pause loop exited 
>    kvm : Choose a better candidate for directed yield 
> ---
>  arch/s390/kvm/Kconfig    |    1 +
>  arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig     |    1 +
>  include/linux/kvm_host.h |   39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  virt/kvm/Kconfig         |    3 +++
>  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c      |   41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  5 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

Reviewed-by: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-07-20 17:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-18 13:37 [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:37 ` [PATCH RFC V5 1/3] kvm/config: Add config to support ple or cpu relax optimzation Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:37 ` [PATCH RFC V5 2/3] kvm: Note down when cpu relax intercepted or pause loop exited Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:38 ` [PATCH RFC V5 3/3] kvm: Choose better candidate for directed yield Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 14:39   ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-19  9:47     ` [RESEND PATCH " Raghavendra K T
2012-07-20 17:36 ` Marcelo Tosatti [this message]
2012-07-22 12:34   ` [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Raghavendra K T
2012-07-22 12:43     ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-23  7:35       ` Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-22 17:58     ` Rik van Riel
2012-07-23 10:03 ` Avi Kivity

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=20120720173640.GA22659@amt.cnet \
    --to=mtosatti@redhat.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=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.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).