linux-kernel.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>, 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;


  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).