public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Yuki Shibuya <shibuya.yk@ncos.nec.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] KVM: x86: remove notifiers from PIT discard policy
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 14:15:59 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160204131558.GA9295@potion.brq.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56B23009.1020109@redhat.com>

2016-02-03 17:51+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 03/02/2016 17:23, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> Discard policy doesn't rely on information from notifiers, so we don't
>> need to register notifiers unconditionally.
>> 
>> Use of ps->lock doesn't make sense, but isn't any worse than before.

Oops, it is worse than before ... toggling KVM_REINJECT_CONTROL when the
guest is running and reading reinject without locking is now far more
complex.  This patch should have also ignored KVM_REINJECT_CONTROL when
PIT has been started.

> Oh, it's perfectly okay.  Too fine-grained locks are bad, and lock
> contention on ps->lock is a non-issue.
> 
> Can you however add a patch that says what fields of kvm_kpit_state are
> protected by which locks?

Ok.  (I'll be careful to not rewrite the whole PIT while at it. :])

>                            Then this patch will just add
> 
> 	/* Protected by kvm_kpit_state lock.  */
> 
> above the reinject field.

There was no need to lock reinject in the past and v2 will hopefully
achieve it again.

> Otherwise
> 
> Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>

Thanks.  (Might not be applicable to v2, though; sorry.)

      reply	other threads:[~2016-02-04 13:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-03 16:23 [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: change and fix PIT discard tick policy Radim Krčmář
2016-02-03 16:23 ` [PATCH 1/4] KVM: x86: fix interrupt dropping race in PIT Radim Krčmář
2016-02-04 13:35   ` Radim Krčmář
2016-02-03 16:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] KVM: x86: refactor PIT state inject_lock Radim Krčmář
2016-02-03 16:45   ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-02-04 13:13     ` Radim Krčmář
2016-02-03 16:23 ` [PATCH 3/4] KVM: x86: change PIT discard tick policy Radim Krčmář
2016-02-03 16:48   ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-02-03 16:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] KVM: x86: remove notifiers from PIT discard policy Radim Krčmář
2016-02-03 16:51   ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-02-04 13:15     ` Radim Krčmář [this message]

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=20160204131558.GA9295@potion.brq.redhat.com \
    --to=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=shibuya.yk@ncos.nec.co.jp \
    /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