Date:	Sun, 22 Jul 2012 18:04:37 +0530
From:	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
CC:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Srikar <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	S390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
	Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>,
	"Andrew M. Theurer" <habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 <x86@...nel.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, linux390@...ibm.com,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler

On 07/20/2012 11:06 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 07:07:17PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>>
>> Currently Pause Loop Exit (PLE) handler is doing directed yield to a
>> random vcpu on pl-exit. We already have filtering while choosing
>> the candidate to yield_to. This change adds more checks while choosing
>> a candidate to yield_to.
>>
>> On a large vcpu guests, there is a high probability of
>> yielding to the same vcpu who had recently done a pause-loop exit.
>> Such a yield can lead to the vcpu spinning again.
>>
>> The patchset keeps track of the pause loop exit and gives chance to a
>> vcpu which has:
>>
>>   (a) Not done pause loop exit at all (probably he is preempted lock-holder)
>>
>>   (b) vcpu skipped in last iteration because it did pause loop exit, and
>>   probably has become eligible now (next eligible lock holder)
>>
>> This concept also helps in cpu relax interception cases which use same handler.
>>
>> Changes since V4:
>>   - Naming Change (Avi):
>>    struct ple ==>  struct spin_loop
>>    cpu_relax_intercepted ==>  in_spin_loop
>>    vcpu_check_and_update_eligible ==>  vcpu_eligible_for_directed_yield
>>   - mark vcpu in spinloop as not eligible to avoid influence of previous exit
>>
>> Changes since V3:
>>   - arch specific fix/changes (Christian)
>>
>> Changes since v2:
>>   - Move ple structure to common code (Avi)
>>   - rename pause_loop_exited to cpu_relax_intercepted (Avi)
>>   - add config HAVE_KVM_CPU_RELAX_INTERCEPT (Avi)
>>   - Drop superfluous curly braces (Ingo)
>>
>> Changes since v1:
>>   - Add more documentation for structure and algorithm and Rename
>>     plo ==>  ple (Rik).
>>   - change dy_eligible initial value to false. (otherwise very first directed
>>      yield will not be skipped. (Nikunj)
>>   - fixup signoff/from issue
>>
>> Future enhancements:
>>    (1) Currently we have a boolean to decide on eligibility of vcpu. It
>>      would be nice if I get feedback on guest (>32 vcpu) whether we can
>>      improve better with integer counter. (with counter = say f(log n )).
>>
>>    (2) We have not considered system load during iteration of vcpu. With
>>     that information we can limit the scan and also decide whether schedule()
>>     is better. [ I am able to use #kicked vcpus to decide on this But may
>>     be there are better ideas like information from global loadavg.]
>>
>>    (3) We can exploit this further with PV patches since it also knows about
>>     next eligible lock-holder.
>>
>> Summary: There is a very good improvement for kvm based guest on PLE machine.
>> The V5 has huge improvement for kbench.
>>
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>     base_rik    stdev       patched      stdev       %improve
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>                kernbench (time in sec lesser is better)
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>   1x    49.2300     1.0171    22.6842     0.3073    117.0233 %
>>   2x    91.9358     1.7768    53.9608     1.0154    70.37516 %
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>                ebizzy (records/sec more is better)
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>   1x  1129.2500    28.6793    2125.6250    32.8239    88.23334 %
>>   2x  1892.3750    75.1112    2377.1250   181.6822    25.61596 %
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>
>> Note: The patches are tested on x86.
>>
>>   Links
>>    V4: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/16/80
>>    V3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/12/437
>>    V2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/10/392
>>    V1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/9/32
>>
>>   Raghavendra K T (3):
>>     config: Add config to support ple or cpu relax optimzation
>>     kvm : Note down when cpu relax intercepted or pause loop exited
>>     kvm : Choose a better candidate for directed yield
>> ---
>>   arch/s390/kvm/Kconfig    |    1 +
>>   arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig     |    1 +
>>   include/linux/kvm_host.h |   39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   virt/kvm/Kconfig         |    3 +++
>>   virt/kvm/kvm_main.c      |   41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   5 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> Reviewed-by: Marcelo Tosatti<mtosatti@...hat.com>
>

Thanks Marcelo for the review. Avi, Rik, Christian, please let me know
if this series looks good now.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists