[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6609138c-6a29-5106-39a8-3219ce47f01a@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 11:55:12 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
Christoffer Dall <cdall@...aro.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] KVM: use RCU to allow dynamic kvm->vcpus array
On 17.08.2017 11:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 17/08/2017 11:28, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 11:16:59 +0200
>> Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 17/08/2017 09:36, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>>>> What if we just sent a "vcpu move" request to all vcpus with the new
>>>>> pointer after it moved? That way the vcpu thread itself would be
>>>>> responsible for the migration to the new memory region. Only if all
>>>>> vcpus successfully moved, keep rolling (and allow foreign get_vcpu again).
>>>>>
>>>>> That way we should be basically lock-less and scale well. For additional
>>>>> icing, feel free to increase the vcpu array x2 every time it grows to
>>>>> not run into the slow path too often.
>>>>
>>>> I'd prefer the rcu approach: This is a mechanism already understood
>>>> well, no need to come up with a new one that will likely have its own
>>>> share of problems.
>>>
>>> What Alex is proposing _is_ RCU, except with a homegrown
>>> synchronize_rcu. Using kvm->srcu seems to be the best of both worlds.
>>
>> I'm worried a bit about the 'homegrown' part, though.
>
> I agree, that's why I'm suggesting SRCU instead. But it's a trick that
> has its uses. For example, if you were only doing reads from a work
> queue, flush_work_queue could be used as the "homegrown
> synchronize_rcu". In KVM you might use kvm_make_all_cpus_request, I guess.
>
>> I also may be misunderstanding what Alex means with "vcpu move"...
>
> My interpretation was "resizing the array" (so it moves in memory).
>
> Paolo
>
Unpopular opinion: Let's keep it simple first (straight rcu) and
optimize later on.
--
Thanks,
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists