From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754095AbbDQKzW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 17 Apr 2015 06:55:22 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:50117 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752002AbbDQKzT (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 17 Apr 2015 06:55:19 -0400
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:55:06 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        gleb@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, mtosatti@redhat.com,
        luto@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] First batch of KVM changes for 4.1
Message-ID: <20150417105506.GF5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1428678089-16291-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
 <20150417085238.GJ17717@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20150417091745.GA24151@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <5530DBED.5080508@redhat.com>
 <20150417103654.GE5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <5530E28F.2030401@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5530E28F.2030401@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:38:07PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 17/04/2015 12:36, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Now you make everybody pay for your crap, x86-64 paravirt or not. Keep
> > the cost by those who need it.
> > 
> > Please take it out, ASAP.
> 
> I'll just implement the static key.

Can you first show that:

preempt_out:
	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
	if (vcpu->cpu != cpu)
		vcpu->cpu = cpu;

preempt_in:
	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
	if (unlikely(vcpu->cpu != cpu))
		do_vcpu_migration_callback(cpu);

Is actually a measurable performance hit and we actually _need_ the
migration callback?

Also, it looks like you already do exactly this for other things, look
at:

	kvm_sched_in()
	  kvm_arch_vcpu_load()
	    if (unlikely(vcpu->cpu != cpu) ... )

So no, I don't believe for one second you need this.