From: Guoheyi <guoheyi@huawei.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
"Suzuki K Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm/arm64: change gicv3_cpuif to static likely branch
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 14:58:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <496cb45d-c312-295c-18f2-633ec5acc976@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86mucdzx45.wl-maz@kernel.org>
On 2019/11/30 14:39, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Nov 2019 03:14:43 +0000,
> Heyi Guo <guoheyi@huawei.com> wrote:
>> Platforms running hypervisor nowadays are normally powerful servers
>> which at least support GICv3, so it should be better to switch
>> kvm_vgic_global_state.gicv3_cpuif to static likely branch, which can
>> reduce two "b" instructions to a single "nop" for GICv3 branches.
>>
>> We don't update arm32 specific code for they may still only have
>> GICv2.
> There is a number of disputable statements here.
>
> Out of the fairly large zoo of arm64 systems I have access to, 75% of
> them are based on GICv2, so they are still the overwhelming majority.
> Yes, they all run KVM (otherwise I would ignore them).
Really? I'm surprised to know that... Sorry I didn't see such GICv2
platforms in my work, so I made the wrong assumption.
I don't expect much performance improvement for GICv3 platforms. The
precondition for this patch is that few platforms running KVM are using
GICv2. If it is not right, please just ignore it.
Thanks,
HG
>
> Furthermore, I would expect that "powerful servers" are perfectly
> capable to execute a couple of branches without breaking a sweat.
>
> Finally, you don't provide any number supporting that:
>
> - GICv3 systems see a performance improvement across the large variety
> of CPU implementations
> - GICv2 systems don't see a performance regression
>
> Once you provide such numbers, I'll reevaluate my position. Until
> then, I'm not considering this kind of change.
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-30 6:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-30 3:14 [PATCH] kvm/arm64: change gicv3_cpuif to static likely branch Heyi Guo
2019-11-30 6:39 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-11-30 6:58 ` Guoheyi [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=496cb45d-c312-295c-18f2-633ec5acc976@huawei.com \
--to=guoheyi@huawei.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=will@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 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).