From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, pbonzini@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>,
peterz@infradead.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
bigeasy@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
joel@joelfernandes.org, will@kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] kvm: Replace vcpu->swait with rcuwait
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 09:41:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200423094140.69909bbb@why> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200422040739.18601-5-dave@stgolabs.net>
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 21:07:38 -0700
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> wrote:
> The use of any sort of waitqueue (simple or regular) for
> wait/waking vcpus has always been an overkill and semantically
> wrong. Because this is per-vcpu (which is blocked) there is
> only ever a single waiting vcpu, thus no need for any sort of
> queue.
>
> As such, make use of the rcuwait primitive, with the following
> considerations:
>
> - rcuwait already provides the proper barriers that serialize
> concurrent waiter and waker.
>
> - Task wakeup is done in rcu read critical region, with a
> stable task pointer.
>
> - Because there is no concurrency among waiters, we need
> not worry about rcuwait_wait_event() calls corrupting
> the wait->task. As a consequence, this saves the locking
> done in swait when modifying the queue. This also applies
> to per-vcore wait for powerpc kvm-hv.
>
> The x86 tscdeadline_latency test mentioned in 8577370fb0cb
> ("KVM: Use simple waitqueue for vcpu->wq") shows that, on avg,
> latency is reduced by around 15-20% with this change.
>
> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
> Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Cc: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
> ---
> arch/mips/kvm/mips.c | 6 ++----
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s.h | 2 +-
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 +-
> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c | 22 ++++++++--------------
> arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c | 2 +-
> arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 2 +-
> include/linux/kvm_host.h | 10 +++++-----
> virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c | 2 +-
> virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 9 +++++----
> virt/kvm/async_pf.c | 3 +--
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 19 +++++++++----------
> 11 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
[...]
I should have tested it *before* acking it, really.
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> index 93bd59b46848..b2805105bbe5 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
> @@ -593,7 +593,7 @@ void kvm_timer_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> if (map.emul_ptimer)
> soft_timer_cancel(&map.emul_ptimer->hrtimer);
>
> - if (swait_active(kvm_arch_vcpu_wq(vcpu)))
> + if (rcu_dereference(kvm_arch_vpu_get_wait(vcpu)) != NULL)
This doesn't compile (wrong function name, and rcu_dereference takes a
variable). But whatever it would do if we fixed it looks dodgy. it isn't
the rcuwait structure that you want to dereference, but rcuwait->task
(we are checking whether we are called because we are blocking or being
preempted).
> kvm_timer_blocking(vcpu);
>
> /*
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> index 48d0ec44ad77..f94a10bb1251 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> @@ -579,16 +579,17 @@ void kvm_arm_resume_guest(struct kvm *kvm)
>
> kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
> vcpu->arch.pause = false;
> - swake_up_one(kvm_arch_vcpu_wq(vcpu));
> + rcuwait_wake_up(kvm_arch_vcpu_get_wait(vcpu));
> }
> }
>
> static void vcpu_req_sleep(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> - struct swait_queue_head *wq = kvm_arch_vcpu_wq(vcpu);
> + struct rcuwait *wait = kvm_arch_vcpu_get_wait(vcpu);
>
> - swait_event_interruptible_exclusive(*wq, ((!vcpu->arch.power_off) &&
> - (!vcpu->arch.pause)));
> + rcuwait_wait_event(*wait,
> + (!vcpu->arch.power_off) &&(!vcpu->arch.pause),
> + TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
As noticed by the kbuild robot, this doesn't compile either.
I fixed it as follow, and it survived a very basic test run in a model
(more testing later).
Thanks,
M.
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
index b2805105bbe56..2dbd14dcae9fb 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arch_timer.c
@@ -569,6 +569,7 @@ bool kvm_timer_should_notify_user(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
void kvm_timer_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
+ struct rcuwait *wait = kvm_arch_vcpu_get_wait(vcpu);
struct arch_timer_cpu *timer = vcpu_timer(vcpu);
struct timer_map map;
@@ -593,7 +594,7 @@ void kvm_timer_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
if (map.emul_ptimer)
soft_timer_cancel(&map.emul_ptimer->hrtimer);
- if (rcu_dereference(kvm_arch_vpu_get_wait(vcpu)) != NULL)
+ if (rcu_dereference(wait->task))
kvm_timer_blocking(vcpu);
/*
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
index f94a10bb1251b..479f36d02418d 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
@@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ static void vcpu_req_sleep(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
struct rcuwait *wait = kvm_arch_vcpu_get_wait(vcpu);
- rcuwait_wait_event(*wait,
+ rcuwait_wait_event(wait,
(!vcpu->arch.power_off) &&(!vcpu->arch.pause),
TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-23 8:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-22 4:07 [PATCH v3 -tip 0/5] kvm: Use rcuwait for vcpu blocking Davidlohr Bueso
2020-04-22 4:07 ` [PATCH 1/5] rcuwait: Fix stale wake call name in comment Davidlohr Bueso
2020-04-22 4:07 ` [PATCH 2/5] rcuwait: Let rcuwait_wake_up() return whether or not a task was awoken Davidlohr Bueso
2020-04-22 4:07 ` [PATCH 3/5] rcuwait: Introduce prepare_to and finish_rcuwait Davidlohr Bueso
2020-04-23 9:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-22 4:07 ` [PATCH 4/5] kvm: Replace vcpu->swait with rcuwait Davidlohr Bueso
2020-04-22 8:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-22 10:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-04-23 8:41 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2020-04-23 8:57 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-23 9:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-23 9:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-22 4:07 ` [PATCH 5/5] sched/swait: Reword some of the main description Davidlohr Bueso
2020-05-01 18:22 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Davidlohr Bueso
2020-04-22 11:33 ` [PATCH v3 -tip 0/5] kvm: Use rcuwait for vcpu blocking Peter Zijlstra
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=20200423094140.69909bbb@why \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will@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