linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 2/4] Add yield hypercall for KVM guests

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100803053327.GC29526@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 3 Aug 2010 11:03:27 +0530
From:	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	npiggin@...e.de, kvm@...r.kernel.org, bharata@...ibm.com,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, efault@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/4] Add yield hypercall for KVM guests

On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 10:46:59AM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 11:40:23AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > >>Can you do a directed yield?
> > >We don't have that support yet in Linux scheduler.
> > 
> > If you think it's useful, it would be good to design it into the
> > interface, and fall back to ordinary yield if the host doesn't
> > support it.
> > 
> > A big advantage of directed yield vs yield is that you conserve
> > resources within a VM; a simple yield will cause the guest to drop
> > its share of cpu to other guest.
> 
> Hmm .. I see possibility of modifying yield to reclaim its "lost" timeslice when
> its scheduled next as well. Basically remember what timeslice we have given
> up and add that as its "bonus" when it runs next. That would keep the dynamics
> of yield donation/reclaim local to the (physical) cpu and IMHO is less complex
> than dealing with directed yield between tasks located across different physical
> cpus. That would also address the fairness issue with yield you are pointing at?

Basically with directed yield, we need to deal with these issues:

- Timeslice inflation of target (lock-holder) vcpu affecting fair-time of other
  guests vcpus.
- Intra-VM fairness - different vcpus could get different fair-time, depending
  on how much of a lock-holder/spinner a vcpu is

By simply educating yield to reclaim its lost share, I feel we can avoid these
complexities and get most of the benefit of yield-on-contention.

CCing other shceduler experts for their opinion of directed yield.

- vatsa
--
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/