[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4efe4fdb91b747da93d7980c10d016c9@baidu.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 12:16:53 +0000
From: "Li,Rongqing" <lirongqing@...du.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
CC: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: 答复: [PATCH] KVM: Consider SMT idle status when halt polling
> > > SMT siblings share caches and other hardware, halt polling will
> > > degrade its sibling performance if its sibling is busy
> >
> > Do you have any real scenario benefits? As the polling nature, some
> > cloud providers will configure to their preferred balance of cpu usage
> > and performance, and other cloud providers for their NFV scenarios
> > which are more sensitive to latency are vCPU and pCPU 1:1 pin,you
> > destroy these setups.
> >
> > Wanpeng
>
Run a copy (single thread) Unixbench, with or without a busy poll program in its SMT sibling, and Unixbench score can lower 1/3 with SMT busy polling program
Can this case show this issue?
-Li
> True, it benefits for our real scenario.
>
> this patch can lower our workload compute latency in our multiple cores VM
> which vCPU and pCPU is 1:1 pin, and the workload with lots of computation and
> networking packets.
>
> -Li
Powered by blists - more mailing lists