From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@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 V3 3/3] kvm: Choose better candidate for directed yield
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:48:24 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120712191822.30440.56318.sendpatchset@codeblue> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120712191712.30440.68944.sendpatchset@codeblue>
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Currently, on a large vcpu guests, there is a high probability of
yielding to the same vcpu who had recently done a pause-loop exit or
cpu relax intercepted. Such a yield can lead to the vcpu spinning
again and hence degrade the performance.
The patchset keeps track of the pause loop exit/cpu relax interception
and gives chance to a vcpu which:
(a) Has not done pause loop exit or cpu relax intercepted at all
(probably he is preempted lock-holder)
(b) Was skipped in last iteration because it did pause loop exit or
cpu relax intercepted, and probably has become eligible now
(next eligible lock holder)
Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
v2 patches were:
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 4ec0120..50f6e60 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -1570,6 +1570,38 @@ bool kvm_vcpu_yield_to(struct kvm_vcpu *target)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_vcpu_yield_to);
+/*
+ * Helper that checks whether a VCPU is eligible for directed yield.
+ * Most eligible candidate to yield is decided by following heuristics:
+ *
+ * (a) VCPU which has not done pl-exit or cpu relax intercepted recently
+ * (preempted lock holder), indicated by @cpu_relax_intercepted.
+ * Set at the beiginning and cleared at the end of interception/PLE handler.
+ *
+ * (b) VCPU which has done pl-exit/ cpu relax intercepted but did not get
+ * chance last time (mostly it has become eligible now since we have probably
+ * yielded to lockholder in last iteration. This is done by toggling
+ * @dy_eligible each time a VCPU checked for eligibility.)
+ *
+ * Yielding to a recently pl-exited/cpu relax intercepted VCPU before yielding
+ * to preempted lock-holder could result in wrong VCPU selection and CPU
+ * burning. Giving priority for a potential lock-holder increases lock
+ * progress.
+ */
+bool kvm_vcpu_check_and_update_eligible(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+ bool eligible;
+
+ eligible = !vcpu->ple.cpu_relax_intercepted ||
+ (vcpu->ple.cpu_relax_intercepted &&
+ vcpu->ple.dy_eligible);
+
+ if (vcpu->ple.cpu_relax_intercepted)
+ vcpu->ple.dy_eligible = !vcpu->ple.dy_eligible;
+
+ return eligible;
+}
+
void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
{
struct kvm *kvm = me->kvm;
@@ -1598,6 +1630,8 @@ void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
continue;
if (waitqueue_active(&vcpu->wq))
continue;
+ if (!kvm_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:[~2012-07-12 19:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-12 19:17 [PATCH RFC V3 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Raghavendra K T
2012-07-12 19:17 ` [PATCH RFC V3 1/3] kvm/config: Add config to support ple or cpu relax optimzation Raghavendra K T
2012-07-12 19:18 ` [PATCH RFC V3 2/3] kvm: Note down when cpu relax intercepted or pause loop exited Raghavendra K T
2012-07-12 20:02 ` Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-13 3:35 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-13 6:13 ` Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-13 10:11 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-13 13:54 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-07-16 7:38 ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-12 19:18 ` Raghavendra K T [this message]
2012-07-12 19:23 ` [PATCH RFC V3 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Raghavendra K T
2012-07-19 9:15 ` [RESEND PATCH " 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=20120712191822.30440.56318.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).