[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F291E1F.3030505@oss.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 20:12:31 +0900
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@....ntt.co.jp>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] srcu: Implement call_srcu()
(2012/02/01 20:01), Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/01/2012 01:00 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
>> How about just doing:
>>
>> take a spin_lock
>> copy the entire (or some portions of) bitmap locally
>> clear the bitmap
>> unlock
>>
>
> That means that vcpus dirtying memory also have to take that lock, and
> spin while the bitmap is being copied. So kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log()
> will become faster, at the expense of vcpus, which I think is a bad
> tradeoff.
Almost every caller is already holding the mmu_lock.
Isn't it possible to make others hold the lock only for the case of
marking to the bitmap? (I will check myself too.)
>> write protect the dirty pages based on the copied dirty data
>>
>> copy_to_user
>>
>>
>>
>> I can show you some performance numbers, this weekend, if you like.
>
> That'll be great, numbers are better than speculation.
>
Yes, I already have some good numbers to show (and some patches).
Takuya
--
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