kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: LAPIC: Periodically revaluate appropriate lapic_timer_advance_ns
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 12:04:48 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANRm+CzGNyST4=BtE-eKvjB-PUVVoM-gUC2Np8NH7tm0Gp2_nQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ba07fb02-9b55-15e4-d240-24da59e09369@redhat.com>

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019 at 20:50, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/08/19 11:06, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 at 18:24, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 09/08/19 07:45, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
> >>>
> >>> Even if for realtime CPUs, cache line bounces, frequency scaling, presence
> >>> of higher-priority RT tasks, etc can cause different response. These
> >>> interferences should be considered and periodically revaluate whether
> >>> or not the lapic_timer_advance_ns value is the best, do nothing if it is,
> >>> otherwise recaluate again.
> >>
> >> How much fluctuation do you observe between different runs?
> >
> > Sometimes can ~1000 cycles after converting to guest tsc freq.
>
> Hmm, I wonder if we need some kind of continuous smoothing.  Something like

Actually this can fluctuate drastically instead of continuous
smoothing during testing (running linux guest instead of
kvm-unit-tests).

>
>         if (abs(advance_expire_delta) < LAPIC_TIMER_ADVANCE_ADJUST_DONE) {
>                 /* no update for random fluctuations */
>                 return;
>         }
>
>         if (unlikely(timer_advance_ns > 5000))
>                 timer_advance_ns = LAPIC_TIMER_ADVANCE_ADJUST_INIT;
>         apic->lapic_timer.timer_advance_ns = timer_advance_ns;
>
> and removing all the timer_advance_adjust_done stuff.  What do you think?

I just sent out v2, periodically revaluate and get a minimal
conservative value from these revaluate points. Please have a look. :)

Regards,
Wanpeng Li

      reply	other threads:[~2019-08-15  4:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-09  5:45 [PATCH] KVM: LAPIC: Periodically revaluate appropriate lapic_timer_advance_ns Wanpeng Li
2019-08-09 10:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-08-12  9:06   ` Wanpeng Li
2019-08-14 12:50     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-08-15  4:04       ` Wanpeng Li [this message]

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='CANRm+CzGNyST4=BtE-eKvjB-PUVVoM-gUC2Np8NH7tm0Gp2_nQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=kernellwp@gmail.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).