From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V6 0/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 15:37:42 +0530
Message-ID: <4F7585EE.7060203@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20120321102041.473.61069.sendpatchset@codeblue.in.ibm.com> <4F707C5F.1000905@redhat.com>	<4F716E31.3000803@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CAMy5W3foop40+R1RLv_JPhnO5ZmV90uMmNERYY-e3QCeaJfqLw@mail.gmail.com> <4F73568D.7000703@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4F743247.5080407@redhat.com> <4F74A405.2040609@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <4F74A405.2040609@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Alan Meadows <alan.meadows@gmail.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Xen Devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>, Virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>, Stephan Diestelhorst <stephan.diestelhorst@amd.com>, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Attilio Rao <attilio.rao@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 03/29/2012 11:33 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> On 03/29/2012 03:28 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 03/28/2012 08:21 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:

> I really like below ideas. Thanks for that!.
>
>> - from the PLE handler, don't wake up a vcpu that is sleeping because it
>> is waiting for a kick
>
> How about, adding another pass in the beginning of kvm_vcpu_on_spin()
> to check if any vcpu is already kicked. This would almost result in
> yield_to(kicked_vcpu). IMO this is also worth trying.
>
> will try above ideas soon.
>

I have patch something like below in mind to try:

diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index d3b98b1..5127668 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -1608,15 +1608,18 @@ void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
  	 * else and called schedule in __vcpu_run.  Hopefully that
  	 * VCPU is holding the lock that we need and will release it.
  	 * We approximate round-robin by starting at the last boosted VCPU.
+	 * Priority is given to vcpu that are unhalted.
  	 */
-	for (pass = 0; pass < 2 && !yielded; pass++) {
+	for (pass = 0; pass < 3 && !yielded; pass++) {
  		kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
  			struct task_struct *task = NULL;
  			struct pid *pid;
-			if (!pass && i < last_boosted_vcpu) {
+			if (!pass && !vcpu->pv_unhalted)
+				continue;
+			else if (pass == 1 && i < last_boosted_vcpu) {
  				i = last_boosted_vcpu;
  				continue;
-			} else if (pass && i > last_boosted_vcpu)
+			} else if (pass == 2 && i > last_boosted_vcpu)
  				break;
  			if (vcpu == me)
  				continue;