All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Srikar <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	S390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@hp.com>,
	"Andrew M. Theurer" <habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 <x86@kernel.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
	linux390@de.ibm.com,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@gmail.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 18:04:37 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <500BF35D.6050605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120720173640.GA22659@amt.cnet>

On 07/20/2012 11:06 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 07:07:17PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>>
>> Currently Pause Loop Exit (PLE) handler is doing directed yield to a
>> random vcpu on pl-exit. We already have filtering while choosing
>> the candidate to yield_to. This change adds more checks while choosing
>> a candidate to yield_to.
>>
>> On a large vcpu guests, there is a high probability of
>> yielding to the same vcpu who had recently done a pause-loop exit.
>> Such a yield can lead to the vcpu spinning again.
>>
>> The patchset keeps track of the pause loop exit and gives chance to a
>> vcpu which has:
>>
>>   (a) Not done pause loop exit at all (probably he is preempted lock-holder)
>>
>>   (b) vcpu skipped in last iteration because it did pause loop exit, and
>>   probably has become eligible now (next eligible lock holder)
>>
>> This concept also helps in cpu relax interception cases which use same handler.
>>
>> Changes since V4:
>>   - Naming Change (Avi):
>>    struct ple ==>  struct spin_loop
>>    cpu_relax_intercepted ==>  in_spin_loop
>>    vcpu_check_and_update_eligible ==>  vcpu_eligible_for_directed_yield
>>   - mark vcpu in spinloop as not eligible to avoid influence of previous exit
>>
>> Changes since V3:
>>   - arch specific fix/changes (Christian)
>>
>> Changes since v2:
>>   - Move ple structure to common code (Avi)
>>   - rename pause_loop_exited to cpu_relax_intercepted (Avi)
>>   - add config HAVE_KVM_CPU_RELAX_INTERCEPT (Avi)
>>   - Drop superfluous curly braces (Ingo)
>>
>> Changes since v1:
>>   - Add more documentation for structure and algorithm and Rename
>>     plo ==>  ple (Rik).
>>   - change dy_eligible initial value to false. (otherwise very first directed
>>      yield will not be skipped. (Nikunj)
>>   - fixup signoff/from issue
>>
>> Future enhancements:
>>    (1) Currently we have a boolean to decide on eligibility of vcpu. It
>>      would be nice if I get feedback on guest (>32 vcpu) whether we can
>>      improve better with integer counter. (with counter = say f(log n )).
>>
>>    (2) We have not considered system load during iteration of vcpu. With
>>     that information we can limit the scan and also decide whether schedule()
>>     is better. [ I am able to use #kicked vcpus to decide on this But may
>>     be there are better ideas like information from global loadavg.]
>>
>>    (3) We can exploit this further with PV patches since it also knows about
>>     next eligible lock-holder.
>>
>> Summary: There is a very good improvement for kvm based guest on PLE machine.
>> The V5 has huge improvement for kbench.
>>
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>     base_rik    stdev       patched      stdev       %improve
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>                kernbench (time in sec lesser is better)
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>   1x    49.2300     1.0171    22.6842     0.3073    117.0233 %
>>   2x    91.9358     1.7768    53.9608     1.0154    70.37516 %
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>                ebizzy (records/sec more is better)
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>   1x  1129.2500    28.6793    2125.6250    32.8239    88.23334 %
>>   2x  1892.3750    75.1112    2377.1250   181.6822    25.61596 %
>> +-----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+
>>
>> Note: The patches are tested on x86.
>>
>>   Links
>>    V4: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/16/80
>>    V3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/12/437
>>    V2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/10/392
>>    V1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/9/32
>>
>>   Raghavendra K T (3):
>>     config: Add config to support ple or cpu relax optimzation
>>     kvm : Note down when cpu relax intercepted or pause loop exited
>>     kvm : Choose a better candidate for directed yield
>> ---
>>   arch/s390/kvm/Kconfig    |    1 +
>>   arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig     |    1 +
>>   include/linux/kvm_host.h |   39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   virt/kvm/Kconfig         |    3 +++
>>   virt/kvm/kvm_main.c      |   41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   5 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> Reviewed-by: Marcelo Tosatti<mtosatti@redhat.com>
>

Thanks Marcelo for the review. Avi, Rik, Christian, please let me know
if this series looks good now.


  reply	other threads:[~2012-07-22 12:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-18 13:37 [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:37 ` [PATCH RFC V5 1/3] kvm/config: Add config to support ple or cpu relax optimzation Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:37 ` [PATCH RFC V5 2/3] kvm: Note down when cpu relax intercepted or pause loop exited Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 13:38 ` [PATCH RFC V5 3/3] kvm: Choose better candidate for directed yield Raghavendra K T
2012-07-18 14:39   ` Raghavendra K T
2012-07-19  9:47     ` [RESEND PATCH " Raghavendra K T
2012-07-20 17:36 ` [PATCH RFC V5 0/3] kvm: Improving directed yield in PLE handler Marcelo Tosatti
2012-07-22 12:34   ` Raghavendra K T [this message]
2012-07-22 12:43     ` Avi Kivity
2012-07-23  7:35       ` Christian Borntraeger
2012-07-22 17:58     ` Rik van Riel
2012-07-23 10:03 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-07 13:11   ` [RFC][PATCH] Improving directed yield scalability for " Andrew Theurer
2012-09-07 18:06     ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-07 19:42       ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-08  8:43         ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-09-10 13:16           ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-10 16:03             ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-10 16:56               ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-09-10 17:12                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-10 19:10                   ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-10 20:12                   ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-10 20:19                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-10 20:31                       ` Rik van Riel
2012-09-11  6:08                     ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-11 12:48                       ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-11 18:27                       ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-13 11:48                         ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-13 21:30                           ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-14 17:10                             ` Andrew Jones
2012-09-15 16:08                               ` Raghavendra K T
2012-09-17 13:48                                 ` Andrew Jones
2012-09-14 20:34                             ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-09-17  8:02                               ` Andrew Jones
2012-09-16  8:55                             ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-17  8:10                               ` Andrew Jones
2012-09-18  3:03                               ` Andrew Theurer
2012-09-19 13:39                                 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-13 12:13                         ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-11  7:04                   ` Srikar Dronamraju
2012-09-10 14:43         ` Raghavendra K T

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=500BF35D.6050605@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
    --cc=cotte@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=joerg.roedel@amd.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=srivatsa.vaddagiri@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.