Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] KVM: Introduce PV kick in flush tlb

[Marcelo Tosatti]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 01:55:02PM +0530, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2012 05:07:13 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 10:38:17AM +0530, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> > > In place of looping continuously introduce a halt if we do not succeed
> > > after some time.
> > > 
> > > For vcpus that were running an IPI is sent.  In case, it went to sleep
> > > between this, we will be doing flush_on_enter(harmless). But as a
> > > flush IPI was already sent, that will be processed in ipi handler,
> > > this might result into something undesireable, i.e. It might clear the
> > > flush_mask of a new request.
> > > 
> > > So after sending an IPI and waiting for a while, do a halt and wait
> > > for a kick from the last vcpu.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Nikunj A. Dadhania <nikunj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Again, was it determined that this is necessary from data of 
> > benchmarking on the in-guest-mode/out-guest-mode patch?
> > 
> No, this is more of a fix wrt algo.

Please have numbers for the improvement relative to the previous
patch.

It introduces a dependency, these (pvtlbflush and pvspinlocks) are
separate features. It is useful to switch them on/off individually.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/