linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC V6 0/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2012 09:42:18 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
CC:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Xen Devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Attilio Rao <attilio.rao@...rix.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Stephan Diestelhorst <stephan.diestelhorst@....com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC V6 0/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks

On 04/16/2012 09:36 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-04-16 at 16:44 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 09:37:45AM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
>>> * Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> [2012-03-31 00:07:58]:
>>>
>>>> I know that Peter is going to go berserk on me, but if we are running
>>>> a paravirt guest then it's simple to provide a mechanism which allows
>>>> the host (aka hypervisor) to check that in the guest just by looking
>>>> at some global state.
>>>>
>>>> So if a guest exits due to an external event it's easy to inspect the
>>>> state of that guest and avoid to schedule away when it was interrupted
>>>> in a spinlock held section. That guest/host shared state needs to be
>>>> modified to indicate the guest to invoke an exit when the last nested
>>>> lock has been released.
>>> I had attempted something like that long back:
>>>
>>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/6/3/4
>>>
>>> The issue is with ticketlocks though. VCPUs could go into a spin w/o
>>> a lock being held by anybody. Say VCPUs 1-99 try to grab a lock in
>>> that order (on a host with one cpu). VCPU1 wins (after VCPU0 releases it)
>>> and releases the lock. VCPU1 is next eligible to take the lock. If 
>>> that is not scheduled early enough by host, then remaining vcpus would keep 
>>> spinning (even though lock is technically not held by anybody) w/o making 
>>> forward progress.
>>>
>>> In that situation, what we really need is for the guest to hint to host
>>> scheduler to schedule VCPU1 early (via yield_to or something similar). 
>>>
>>> The current pv-spinlock patches however does not track which vcpu is
>>> spinning at what head of the ticketlock. I suppose we can consider 
>>> that optimization in future and see how much benefit it provides (over
>>> plain yield/sleep the way its done now).
>> Right. I think Jeremy played around with this some time?
> 5/11 "xen/pvticketlock: Xen implementation for PV ticket locks" tracks
> which vcpus are waiting for a lock in "cpumask_t waiting_cpus" and
> tracks which lock each is waiting for in per-cpu "lock_waiting". This is
> used in xen_unlock_kick to kick the right CPU. There's a loop over only
> the waiting cpus to figure out who to kick.

Yes, and AFAIK the KVM pv-ticketlock patches do the same thing.  If a
(V)CPU is asleep, then sending it a kick is pretty much equivalent to a
yield to (not precisely, but it should get scheduled soon enough, and it
won't be competing with a pile of VCPUs with no useful work to do).

    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/