[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120307002317.d8682de9c6ccd6af8ccac467@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 00:23:17 +0900
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@...il.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Cc: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@....ntt.co.jp>, avi@...hat.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4 changelog-v2] KVM: Switch to srcu-less
get_dirty_log()
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com> wrote:
> > If we do not mind scanning the bitmap twice, we can decouple the
> > xchg loop and write protection, but it will be a bit slower, and in
> > any case we need to hold mmu_lock until TLB is flushed.
>
> Why is it necessary to scan twice? Simply continuing to the next set
> of pages, after dropping the lock, should be enough.
We cannot drop the lock.
Do you mean doing TLB flush each time before dropping the lock?
> The potential problem i am referring to is:
>
> - kvm.git next + srcu-less series
> average(ns) stdev ns/page pages improvement(%)
>
> 8497356.4 16441.0 32.4 256K -29
>
> So 8ms for 1GB. Assuming it increases linearly, it would take
> 400ms for get_dirty on a 50GB slot (most of that time spent
> with mmu_lock held). Is this correct?
Partly yes: my method mainly depends on the number of dirty pages,
not slot size.
But it is not a new problem: traversing all shadow pages for that
also takes linearly increasing time.
If that 1GB dirty memory is in a 50GB slot, my method will alleviate
the latency really a lot compared to the current way. I do not want
to imagine checking every shadow page in such a huge slot.
Checking pages found in the dirty bitmap only should be better.
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