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 2/2] kvm PLE handler: Choose better candidate for directed yield
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:50:54 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120709062053.24030.52767.sendpatchset@codeblue> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120709062012.24030.37154.sendpatchset@codeblue>
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Currently PLE handler can repeatedly do a directed yield to same vcpu
that has recently done PL exit. This can degrade the performance
Try to yield to most eligible guy instead, by alternate yielding.
Precisely, 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)
Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 5 +++++
arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 +-
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 3 +++
4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index dd17537..884f2c4 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@ -256,5 +256,10 @@ struct kvm_arch{
struct gmap *gmap;
};
+static inline bool kvm_arch_vcpu_check_and_update_eligible(struct kvm_vcpu *v)
+{
+ return true;
+}
+
extern int sie64a(struct kvm_s390_sie_block *, u64 *);
#endif
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index 857ca68..ce01db3 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@ -962,7 +962,7 @@ extern bool kvm_find_async_pf_gfn(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn);
void kvm_complete_insn_gp(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int err);
int kvm_is_in_guest(void);
-
+bool kvm_arch_vcpu_check_and_update_eligible(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
void kvm_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
void kvm_pmu_destroy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
void kvm_pmu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index 07dbd14..24ceae8 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -6623,6 +6623,20 @@ bool kvm_arch_can_inject_async_page_present(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
kvm_x86_ops->interrupt_allowed(vcpu);
}
+bool kvm_arch_vcpu_check_and_update_eligible(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+ bool eligible;
+
+ eligible = !vcpu->arch.plo.pause_loop_exited ||
+ (vcpu->arch.plo.pause_loop_exited &&
+ vcpu->arch.plo.dy_eligible);
+
+ if (vcpu->arch.plo.pause_loop_exited)
+ vcpu->arch.plo.dy_eligible = !vcpu->arch.plo.dy_eligible;
+
+ return eligible;
+}
+
EXPORT_TRACEPOINT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_exit);
EXPORT_TRACEPOINT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_inj_virq);
EXPORT_TRACEPOINT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_page_fault);
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 7e14068..519321a 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -1595,6 +1595,9 @@ void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
continue;
if (waitqueue_active(&vcpu->wq))
continue;
+ if (!kvm_arch_vcpu_check_and_update_eligible(vcpu)) {
+ continue;
+ }
if (kvm_vcpu_yield_to(vcpu)) {
kvm->last_boosted_vcpu = i;
yielded = 1;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-09 6:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-09 6:20 [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Raghavendra K T
2012-07-09 6:20 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] kvm vcpu: Note down pause loop exit Raghavendra K T
2012-07-09 6:33 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-09 22:39 ` Rik van Riel
2012-07-10 11:22 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-11 8:53 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-11 10:52 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-11 11:18 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-11 11:56 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-11 12:41 ` Andrew Jones
2012-07-12 10:58 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2012-07-12 11:02 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-09 6:20 ` Raghavendra K T [this message]
2012-07-09 22:30 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] kvm PLE handler: Choose better candidate for directed yield Rik van Riel
2012-07-10 11:46 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-09 7:55 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-10 8:27 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-11 9:06 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-11 10:17 ` Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-11 11:04 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-11 11:16 ` Alexander Graf
2012-07-11 11:23 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-11 11:52 ` Alexander Graf
2012-07-11 12:48 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-12 2:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-07-11 11:18 ` Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-11 11:39 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-12 5:11 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-12 8:11 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-12 8:32 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-12 2:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-07-12 8:12 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-12 11:24 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-07-12 10:38 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2012-07-11 11:51 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-11 11:55 ` Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-11 12:04 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-11 13:04 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-09 21:47 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-07-10 9:26 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-10 10:07 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler : detailed result Raghavendra K T
2012-07-10 11:54 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Raghavendra K T
2012-07-10 13:27 ` Andrew Theurer
2012-07-11 9:00 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-11 13:59 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-11 14:01 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-12 8:15 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-12 8:25 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-12 12:31 ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-09 22:28 ` Rik van Riel
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=20120709062053.24030.52767.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).