virtualization.lists.linux-foundation.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	Daniel J Blueman <daniel@numascale.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
	Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 16/16] unfair qspinlock: a queue based unfair lock
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 10:30:02 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55268CEA.70303@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150409141348.GX5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On 04/09/2015 10:13 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 09:16:24AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> On 04/09/2015 03:01 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 02:32:19PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>> For a virtual guest with the qspinlock patch, a simple unfair byte lock
>>>> will be used if PV spinlock is not configured in or the hypervisor
>>>> isn't either KVM or Xen. The byte lock works fine with small guest
>>>> of just a few vCPUs. On a much larger guest, however, byte lock can
>>>> have serious performance problem.
>>>
>>> Who cares?
>>
>> There are some people out there running guests with dozens
>> of vCPUs. If the code exists to make those setups run better,
>> is there a good reason not to use it?
> 
> Well use paravirt, !paravirt stuff sucks performance wise anyhow.
> 
> The question really is: is the added complexity worth the maintenance
> burden. And I'm just not convinced !paravirt virt is a performance
> critical target.

Fair enough.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-09 14:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-08 18:32 [PATCH v15 16/16] unfair qspinlock: a queue based unfair lock Waiman Long
2015-04-09  7:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
     [not found] ` <20150409070146.GL27490@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
2015-04-09 13:16   ` Rik van Riel
     [not found]   ` <55267BA8.9060009@redhat.com>
2015-04-09 14:13     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-09 14:30       ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2015-04-09 21:52       ` Waiman Long

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=55268CEA.70303@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
    --cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
    --cc=daniel@numascale.com \
    --cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
    --cc=doug.hatch@hp.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paolo.bonzini@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).