[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FFC853B.30900@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 15:40:43 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
S390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>,
"Andrew M. Theurer" <habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 <x86@...nel.org>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, linux390@...ibm.com,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V2 2/2] kvm PLE handler: Choose better candidate for
directed yield
On 07/10/2012 03:31 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> From: Raghavendra K T<raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Currently PLE handler can repeatedly do a directed yield to same vcpu
> that has recently done PL exit. This can degrade the performance.
>
> Try to yield to most eligible guy instead by alternate yielding.
> Precisely, give chance to a VCPU which has:
> (a) Not done PLE exit at all (probably he is preempted lock-holder)
> (b) VCPU skipped in last iteration because it did PL exit, and probably
> has become eligible now (next eligible lock holder)
>
> Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T<raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
--
All rights reversed
--
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