[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <481786A5.7010604@goop.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:35:49 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
npiggin@...e.de, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/10] x86: convert to generic helpers for IPI function
calls
Jens Axboe wrote:
> -int xen_smp_call_function_mask(cpumask_t mask, void (*func)(void *),
> - void *info, int wait)
>
[...]
> - /* Send a message to other CPUs and wait for them to respond */
> - xen_send_IPI_mask(mask, XEN_CALL_FUNCTION_VECTOR);
> -
> - /* Make sure other vcpus get a chance to run if they need to. */
> - yield = false;
> - for_each_cpu_mask(cpu, mask)
> - if (xen_vcpu_stolen(cpu))
> - yield = true;
> -
> - if (yield)
> - HYPERVISOR_sched_op(SCHEDOP_yield, 0);
>
I added this to deal with the case where you're sending an IPI to
another VCPU which isn't currently running on a real cpu. In this case
you could end up spinning while the other VCPU is waiting for a real CPU
to run on. (Basically the same problem that spinlocks have in a virtual
environment.)
However, this is at best a partial solution to the problem, and I never
benchmarked if it really makes a difference. Since any other virtual
environment would have the same problem, its best if we can solve it
generically. (Of course a synchronous single-target cross-cpu call is a
simple cross-cpu rpc, which could be implemented very efficiently in the
host/hypervisor by simply doing a vcpu context switch...)
J
--
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