From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754460AbaHTMqj (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:46:39 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58262 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753220AbaHTMqT (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:46:19 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 14:46:08 +0200 From: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Gleb Natapov , Raghavendra KT , Vinod Chegu , Hui-Zhi Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] KVM: VMX: clamp PLE window Message-ID: <20140820124607.GD28873@potion.brq.redhat.com> References: <1408480536-8240-1-git-send-email-rkrcmar@redhat.com> <1408480536-8240-6-git-send-email-rkrcmar@redhat.com> <53F44BAE.9040405@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <53F44BAE.9040405@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2014-08-20 09:18+0200, Paolo Bonzini: > Il 19/08/2014 22:35, Radim Krčmář ha scritto: > > Modifications could get unwanted values of PLE window. (low or negative) > > Use ple_window and the maximal value that cannot overflow as bounds. > > > > ple_window_max defaults to a very high value, but it would make sense to > > set it to some fraction of the scheduler tick. > > > > Signed-off-by: Radim Krčmář > > --- > Please introduce a dynamic overflow-avoiding ple_window_max (like what > you have in patch 9) already in patch 4... > > > static void shrink_ple_window(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > @@ -5720,7 +5724,7 @@ static void shrink_ple_window(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > else > > new = old - ple_window_shrink; > > > > - vmx->ple_window = new; > > + vmx->ple_window = max(new, ple_window); > > ... and also squash this in patch 4. > > This patch can then introduce the ple_window_max module parameter (using > module_param_cb to avoid overflows). Will do. --- It is going to make the patches slightly harder to review; Are we doing it because git doesn't bisect on series boundaries?