linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler

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]

Message-ID: <4FFD422B.9060008@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:06:51 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
CC:	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	S390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
	Carsten Otte <cotte@...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 0/2] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler

On 07/09/2012 10:55 AM, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 09/07/12 08:20, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>> Currently Pause Looop Exit (PLE) handler is doing directed yield to a
>> random VCPU on PL exit. Though we already have filtering while choosing
>> the candidate to yield_to, we can do better.
>> 
>> Problem is, for large vcpu guests, we have more probability of yielding
>> to a bad vcpu. We are not able to prevent directed yield to same guy who
>> has done PL exit recently, who perhaps spins again and wastes CPU.
>> 
>> Fix that by keeping track of who has done PL exit. So The Algorithm in series
>> give chance to a VCPU which has:
> 
> 
> We could do the same for s390. The appropriate exit would be diag44 (yield to hypervisor).
> 
> Almost all s390 kernels use diag9c (directed yield to a given guest cpu) for spinlocks, though.

Perhaps x86 should copy this.

> So there is no win here, but there are other cases were diag44 is used, e.g. cpu_relax.
> I have to double check with others, if these cases are critical, but for now, it seems 
> that your dummy implementation  for s390 is just fine. After all it is a no-op until 
> we implement something.

Does the data structure make sense for you?  If so we can move it to
common code (and manage it in kvm_vcpu_on_spin()).  We can guard it with
CONFIG_KVM_HAVE_CPU_RELAX_INTERCEPT or something, so other archs don't
have to pay anything.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


--
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/