From: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Sean Christopherson" <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
"Vitaly Kuznetsov" <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
"Wanpeng Li" <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
"Jim Mattson" <jmattson@google.com>,
"Joerg Roedel" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>,
loobinliu@tencent.com, "# v3 . 10+" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "locking/pvqspinlock: Don't wait if vCPU is preempted"
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 20:16:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANRm+CzxJKqivU6hnO6iahHLDFx6A+zTmoJXpBN8_AkdyKCv7w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fbf152a5-134b-0540-3345-cb6b0b66f1a1@redhat.com>
On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 at 19:06, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/09/19 12:56, Waiman Long wrote:
> > On 9/9/19 2:40 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
> >>
> >> This patch reverts commit 75437bb304b20 (locking/pvqspinlock: Don't wait if
> >> vCPU is preempted), we found great regression caused by this commit.
> >>
> >> Xeon Skylake box, 2 sockets, 40 cores, 80 threads, three VMs, each is 80 vCPUs.
> >> The score of ebizzy -M can reduce from 13000-14000 records/s to 1700-1800
> >> records/s with this commit.
> >>
> >> Host Guest score
> >>
> >> vanilla + w/o kvm optimizes vanilla 1700-1800 records/s
> >> vanilla + w/o kvm optimizes vanilla + revert 13000-14000 records/s
> >> vanilla + w/ kvm optimizes vanilla 4500-5000 records/s
> >> vanilla + w/ kvm optimizes vanilla + revert 14000-15500 records/s
> >>
> >> Exit from aggressive wait-early mechanism can result in yield premature and
> >> incur extra scheduling latency in over-subscribe scenario.
> >>
> >> kvm optimizes:
> >> [1] commit d73eb57b80b (KVM: Boost vCPUs that are delivering interrupts)
> >> [2] commit 266e85a5ec9 (KVM: X86: Boost queue head vCPU to mitigate lock waiter preemption)
> >>
> >> Tested-by: loobinliu@tencent.com
> >> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> >> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> >> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> >> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> >> Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
> >> Cc: loobinliu@tencent.com
> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> >> Fixes: 75437bb304b20 (locking/pvqspinlock: Don't wait if vCPU is preempted)
> >> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
> >> ---
> >> kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
> >> index 89bab07..e84d21a 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
> >> +++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h
> >> @@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ pv_wait_early(struct pv_node *prev, int loop)
> >> if ((loop & PV_PREV_CHECK_MASK) != 0)
> >> return false;
> >>
> >> - return READ_ONCE(prev->state) != vcpu_running || vcpu_is_preempted(prev->cpu);
> >> + return READ_ONCE(prev->state) != vcpu_running;
> >> }
> >>
> >> /*
> >
> > There are several possibilities for this performance regression:
> >
> > 1) Multiple vcpus calling vcpu_is_preempted() repeatedly may cause some
> > cacheline contention issue depending on how that callback is implemented.
>
> Unlikely, it is a single percpu read.
>
> > 2) KVM may set the preempt flag for a short period whenver an vmexit
> > happens even if a vmenter is executed shortly after. In this case, we
> > may want to use a more durable vcpu suspend flag that indicates the vcpu
> > won't get a real vcpu back for a longer period of time.
>
> It sets it for exits to userspace, but they shouldn't really happen on a
> properly-configured system.
>
> However, it's easy to test this theory:
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 2e302e977dac..feb6c75a7a88 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -3368,26 +3368,28 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> int idx;
>
> - if (vcpu->preempted)
> + if (vcpu->preempted) {
> vcpu->arch.preempted_in_kernel = !kvm_x86_ops->get_cpl(vcpu);
>
> - /*
> - * Disable page faults because we're in atomic context here.
> - * kvm_write_guest_offset_cached() would call might_fault()
> - * that relies on pagefault_disable() to tell if there's a
> - * bug. NOTE: the write to guest memory may not go through if
> - * during postcopy live migration or if there's heavy guest
> - * paging.
> - */
> - pagefault_disable();
> - /*
> - * kvm_memslots() will be called by
> - * kvm_write_guest_offset_cached() so take the srcu lock.
> - */
> - idx = srcu_read_lock(&vcpu->kvm->srcu);
> - kvm_steal_time_set_preempted(vcpu);
> - srcu_read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->srcu, idx);
> - pagefault_enable();
> + /*
> + * Disable page faults because we're in atomic context here.
> + * kvm_write_guest_offset_cached() would call might_fault()
> + * that relies on pagefault_disable() to tell if there's a
> + * bug. NOTE: the write to guest memory may not go through if
> + * during postcopy live migration or if there's heavy guest
> + * paging.
> + */
> + pagefault_disable();
> + /*
> + * kvm_memslots() will be called by
> + * kvm_write_guest_offset_cached() so take the srcu lock.
> + */
> + idx = srcu_read_lock(&vcpu->kvm->srcu);
> + kvm_steal_time_set_preempted(vcpu);
> + srcu_read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->srcu, idx);
> + pagefault_enable();
> + }
> +
> kvm_x86_ops->vcpu_put(vcpu);
> vcpu->arch.last_host_tsc = rdtsc();
> /*
>
> Wanpeng, can you try?
Yes, there is no difference for the score.
Wanpeng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-09 12:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-09 1:40 [PATCH] Revert "locking/pvqspinlock: Don't wait if vCPU is preempted" Wanpeng Li
2019-09-09 10:56 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-09 11:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-09-09 12:16 ` Wanpeng Li [this message]
2019-09-10 5:56 ` Wanpeng Li
2019-09-11 4:25 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-11 13:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-09-25 3:15 ` Wanpeng Li
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+CzxJKqivU6hnO6iahHLDFx6A+zTmoJXpBN8_AkdyKCv7w@mail.gmail.com \
--to=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=loobinliu@tencent.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.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).