[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120712191822.30440.56318.sendpatchset@codeblue>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:48:24 +0530
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: S390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>, Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
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: [PATCH RFC V3 3/3] kvm: Choose better candidate for directed yield
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Currently, on a large vcpu guests, there is a high probability of
yielding to the same vcpu who had recently done a pause-loop exit or
cpu relax intercepted. Such a yield can lead to the vcpu spinning
again and hence degrade the performance.
The patchset keeps track of the pause loop exit/cpu relax interception
and gives chance to a vcpu which:
(a) Has not done pause loop exit or cpu relax intercepted at all
(probably he is preempted lock-holder)
(b) Was skipped in last iteration because it did pause loop exit or
cpu relax intercepted, and probably has become eligible now
(next eligible lock holder)
Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
v2 patches were:
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 4ec0120..50f6e60 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -1570,6 +1570,38 @@ bool kvm_vcpu_yield_to(struct kvm_vcpu *target)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_vcpu_yield_to);
+/*
+ * Helper that checks whether a VCPU is eligible for directed yield.
+ * Most eligible candidate to yield is decided by following heuristics:
+ *
+ * (a) VCPU which has not done pl-exit or cpu relax intercepted recently
+ * (preempted lock holder), indicated by @cpu_relax_intercepted.
+ * Set at the beiginning and cleared at the end of interception/PLE handler.
+ *
+ * (b) VCPU which has done pl-exit/ cpu relax intercepted but did not get
+ * chance last time (mostly it has become eligible now since we have probably
+ * yielded to lockholder in last iteration. This is done by toggling
+ * @dy_eligible each time a VCPU checked for eligibility.)
+ *
+ * Yielding to a recently pl-exited/cpu relax intercepted VCPU before yielding
+ * to preempted lock-holder could result in wrong VCPU selection and CPU
+ * burning. Giving priority for a potential lock-holder increases lock
+ * progress.
+ */
+bool kvm_vcpu_check_and_update_eligible(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+ bool eligible;
+
+ eligible = !vcpu->ple.cpu_relax_intercepted ||
+ (vcpu->ple.cpu_relax_intercepted &&
+ vcpu->ple.dy_eligible);
+
+ if (vcpu->ple.cpu_relax_intercepted)
+ vcpu->ple.dy_eligible = !vcpu->ple.dy_eligible;
+
+ return eligible;
+}
+
void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
{
struct kvm *kvm = me->kvm;
@@ -1598,6 +1630,8 @@ void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
continue;
if (waitqueue_active(&vcpu->wq))
continue;
+ if (!kvm_vcpu_check_and_update_eligible(vcpu))
+ continue;
if (kvm_vcpu_yield_to(vcpu)) {
kvm->last_boosted_vcpu = i;
yielded = 1;
--
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