[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5783B6D7.7020903@hpe.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:10:15 -0400
From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
<linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
<mpe@...erman.id.au>, <paulus@...ba.org>,
<benh@...nel.crashing.org>, <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<will.deacon@....com>, <boqun.feng@...il.com>, <dave@...olabs.net>,
<schwidefsky@...ibm.com>, <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] implement vcpu preempted check
On 07/06/2016 02:52 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:43:07AM -0400, Pan Xinhui wrote:
>> change fomr v1:
>> a simplier definition of default vcpu_is_preempted
>> skip mahcine type check on ppc, and add config. remove dedicated macro.
>> add one patch to drop overload of rwsem_spin_on_owner and mutex_spin_on_owner.
>> add more comments
>> thanks boqun and Peter's suggestion.
>>
>> This patch set aims to fix lock holder preemption issues.
>>
>> test-case:
>> perf record -a perf bench sched messaging -g 400 -p&& perf report
>>
>> 18.09% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] osq_lock
>> 12.28% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] rwsem_spin_on_owner
>> 5.27% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_unlock
>> 3.89% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] wait_consider_task
>> 3.64% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] _raw_write_lock_irq
>> 3.41% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_spin_on_owner.is
>> 2.49% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] system_call
>>
>> We introduce interface bool vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu) and use it in some spin
>> loops of osq_lock, rwsem_spin_on_owner and mutex_spin_on_owner.
>> These spin_on_onwer variant also cause rcu stall before we apply this patch set
>>
> Paolo, could you help out with an (x86) KVM interface for this?
>
> Waiman, could you see if you can utilize this to get rid of the
> SPIN_THRESHOLD in qspinlock_paravirt?
That API is certainly useful to make the paravirt spinlock perform
better. However, I am not sure if we can completely get rid of the
SPIN_THRESHOLD at this point. It is not just the kvm, the xen code need
to be modified as well.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists