Re: [PATCH v2] xen/spinlock: Don't use pvqspinlock if only 1 vCPU

From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xen/spinlock: Don't use pvqspinlock if only 1 vCPU
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 18:35:46 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2814c5d2-3016-8e9b-a644-0711fd92b9c7@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1532036397-19449-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com>

On 07/19/2018 05:39 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> On a VM with only 1 vCPU, the locking fast paths will always be
> successful. In this case, there is no need to use the the PV qspinlock
> code which has higher overhead on the unlock side than the native
> qspinlock code.
>
> The xen_pvspin veriable is also turned off in this 1 vCPU case to
> eliminate unneeded pvqspinlock initialization in xen_init_lock_cpu()
> which is run after xen_init_spinlocks().
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>

Reviewed-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>


> ---
>  arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c b/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c
> index cd97a62..973f10e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c
> @@ -130,6 +130,10 @@ void xen_uninit_lock_cpu(int cpu)
>  void __init xen_init_spinlocks(void)
>  {
>  
> +	/*  Don't need to use pvqspinlock code if there is only 1 vCPU. */
> +	if (num_possible_cpus() == 1)
> +		xen_pvspin = false;
> +
>  	if (!xen_pvspin) {
>  		printk(KERN_DEBUG "xen: PV spinlocks disabled\n");
>  		return;