linux-kernel - Re: 答复: [PATCH] KVM: Consider SMT idle status when halt polling

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YP9gkSk+CHdKLP/Q@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jul 2021 01:25:37 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     "Li,Rongqing" <lirongqing@...du.com>
Cc:     Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
        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: Re: 答复: [PATCH] KVM: Consider SMT
 idle status when halt polling

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021, Li,Rongqing wrote:
> > > > 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

Rather than disallowing halt-polling entirely, on x86 it should be sufficient to
simply have the hardware thread yield to its sibling(s) via PAUSE.  It probably
won't get back all performance, but I would expect it to be close. 

This compiles on all KVM architectures, and AFAICT the intended usage of
cpu_relax() is identical for all architectures.

diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 6980dabe9df5..a07ecb3c67fb 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -3111,6 +3111,7 @@ void kvm_vcpu_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
                                goto out;
                        }
                        poll_end = cur = ktime_get();
+                       cpu_relax();
                } while (kvm_vcpu_can_poll(cur, stop));
        }