xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: Chong Li <lichong659@gmail.com>
Cc: Chong Li <chong.li@wustl.edu>, Sisu Xi <xisisu@gmail.com>,
	george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com, dario.faggioli@citrix.com,
	xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Meng Xu <mengxu@cis.upenn.edu>,
	dgolomb@seas.upenn.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 for Xen 4.7 1/4] xen: enable per-VCPU parameter settings for RTDS scheduler
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 05:59:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56DD894802000078000D9F84@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1457286958-5427-2-git-send-email-lichong659@gmail.com>

>>> On 06.03.16 at 18:55, <lichong659@gmail.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/common/sched_credit.c
> +++ b/xen/common/sched_credit.c
> @@ -1054,6 +1054,10 @@ csched_dom_cntl(
>       * lock. Runq lock not needed anywhere in here. */
>      spin_lock_irqsave(&prv->lock, flags);
>  
> +    if ( op->cmd == XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_putvcpuinfo ||
> +         op->cmd == XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_getvcpuinfo )
> +        return -EINVAL;
> +
>      if ( op->cmd == XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_getinfo )
>      {
>          op->u.credit.weight = sdom->weight;

Considering the rest of the code following where, I would - albeit
I'm not maintainer of this code - strongly suggest moving to
switch() in such cases, with the default case returning -EINVAL (or
maybe better -EOPNOTSUPP).

> @@ -1130,23 +1146,17 @@ rt_dom_cntl(
>      unsigned long flags;
>      int rc = 0;
>  
> +    xen_domctl_schedparam_vcpu_t local_sched;
> +    s_time_t period, budget;
> +    uint32_t index = 0;
> +

There's a stray blank line left ahead of this addition.

>      switch ( op->cmd )
>      {
> -    case XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_getinfo:
> -        if ( d->max_vcpus > 0 )
> -        {
> -            spin_lock_irqsave(&prv->lock, flags);
> -            svc = rt_vcpu(d->vcpu[0]);
> -            op->u.rtds.period = svc->period / MICROSECS(1);
> -            op->u.rtds.budget = svc->budget / MICROSECS(1);
> -            spin_unlock_irqrestore(&prv->lock, flags);
> -        }
> -        else
> -        {
> -            /* If we don't have vcpus yet, let's just return the defaults. */
> -            op->u.rtds.period = RTDS_DEFAULT_PERIOD;
> -            op->u.rtds.budget = RTDS_DEFAULT_BUDGET;
> -        }
> +    case XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_getinfo: /* return the default parameters */
> +        spin_lock_irqsave(&prv->lock, flags);
> +        op->u.rtds.period = RTDS_DEFAULT_PERIOD / MICROSECS(1);
> +        op->u.rtds.budget = RTDS_DEFAULT_BUDGET / MICROSECS(1);
> +        spin_unlock_irqrestore(&prv->lock, flags);
>          break;

This alters the values returned when d->max_vcpus == 0 - while
this looks to be intentional, I think calling out such a bug fix in the
description is a must.

> @@ -1163,6 +1173,96 @@ rt_dom_cntl(
>          }
>          spin_unlock_irqrestore(&prv->lock, flags);
>          break;
> +    case XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_getvcpuinfo:
> +        if ( guest_handle_is_null(op->u.v.vcpus) )
> +        {
> +            rc = -EINVAL;

Perhaps rather -EFAULT? But then again - what is this check good for
(considering that it doesn't cover other obviously bad handle values)?

> +            break;
> +        }
> +        while ( index < op->u.v.nr_vcpus )
> +        {
> +            if ( copy_from_guest_offset(&local_sched,
> +                          op->u.v.vcpus, index, 1) )

Indentation.

> +            {
> +                rc = -EFAULT;
> +                break;
> +            }
> +            if ( local_sched.vcpuid >= d->max_vcpus ||
> +                          d->vcpu[local_sched.vcpuid] == NULL )

Again. And more below.

> +            {
> +                rc = -EINVAL;
> +                break;
> +            }
> +
> +            spin_lock_irqsave(&prv->lock, flags);
> +            svc = rt_vcpu(d->vcpu[local_sched.vcpuid]);
> +            local_sched.s.rtds.budget = svc->budget / MICROSECS(1);
> +            local_sched.s.rtds.period = svc->period / MICROSECS(1);
> +            spin_unlock_irqrestore(&prv->lock, flags);
> +
> +            if ( __copy_to_guest_offset(op->u.v.vcpus, index,
> +                    &local_sched, 1) )
> +            {
> +                rc = -EFAULT;
> +                break;
> +            }
> +            if ( (++index > 0x3f) && hypercall_preempt_check() )
> +                break;

So how is the caller going to be able to reliably read all vCPU-s'
information for a guest with more than 64 vCPU-s?

> +        }
> +
> +        if ( !rc && (op->u.v.nr_vcpus != index) )
> +            op->u.v.nr_vcpus = index;

I don't think the right side of the && is really necessary / useful.

> +        break;
> +    case XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_putvcpuinfo:

When switch statements get large, please put blank lines between
individual case blocks.

> +        if ( guest_handle_is_null(op->u.v.vcpus) )
> +        {
> +            rc = -EINVAL;
> +            break;
> +        }
> +        while ( index < op->u.v.nr_vcpus )
> +        {
> +            if ( copy_from_guest_offset(&local_sched,
> +                          op->u.v.vcpus, index, 1) )
> +            {
> +                rc = -EFAULT;
> +                break;
> +            }
> +            if ( local_sched.vcpuid >= d->max_vcpus ||
> +                          d->vcpu[local_sched.vcpuid] == NULL )
> +            {
> +                rc = -EINVAL;
> +                break;
> +            }
> +
> +            period = MICROSECS(local_sched.s.rtds.period);
> +            budget = MICROSECS(local_sched.s.rtds.budget);
> +            if ( period > RTDS_MAX_PERIOD || budget < RTDS_MIN_BUDGET ||
> +                          budget > period || period < RTDS_MIN_PERIOD )
> +            {
> +                rc = -EINVAL;
> +                break;
> +            }
> +
> +            /*
> +             * We accept period/budget less than 100 us, but will warn users about
> +             * the large scheduling overhead due to it
> +             */
> +            if ( period < MICROSECS(100) || budget < MICROSECS(100) )
> +                printk("Warning: period or budget set to less than 100us.\n"
> +                       "This may result in high scheduling overhead.\n");

This should use a log level which is rate limited by default. Quite
likely that would be one of the guest log levels.

> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c
> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
> @@ -1148,10 +1148,19 @@ long sched_adjust(struct domain *d, struct xen_domctl_scheduler_op *op)
>      if ( ret )
>          return ret;
>  
> -    if ( (op->sched_id != DOM2OP(d)->sched_id) ||
> -         ((op->cmd != XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_putinfo) &&
> -          (op->cmd != XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_getinfo)) )
> +    if ( op->sched_id != DOM2OP(d)->sched_id )
>          return -EINVAL;
> +    else
> +        switch ( op->cmd )

Pointless else, pointlessly increasing the necessary indentation
for the entire switch().

> +typedef struct xen_domctl_schedparam_vcpu {
> +    union {
> +        xen_domctl_sched_credit_t credit;
> +        xen_domctl_sched_credit2_t credit2;
> +        xen_domctl_sched_rtds_t rtds;
> +    } s;

Please call such unions "u", as done everywhere else.

> +    uint16_t vcpuid;

Any particular reason to limit this to 16 bits, when elsewhere
we commonly use 32 bits for vCPU IDs?

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-07 12:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-06 17:55 [PATCH v6 for Xen 4.7 0/4] Enable per-VCPU parameter settings for RTDS scheduler Chong Li
2016-03-06 17:55 ` [PATCH v6 for Xen 4.7 1/4] xen: enable " Chong Li
2016-03-07 12:59   ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2016-03-07 16:28     ` Chong Li
2016-03-07 16:40       ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-07 17:53         ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-07 22:16           ` Chong Li
2016-03-08  9:10           ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-08 10:34             ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-08 11:47               ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-08 19:09   ` Wei Liu
2016-03-09 16:10     ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-09 16:38       ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-13 17:05         ` Chong Li
2016-03-14  8:37           ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-14  9:10             ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-14  9:15               ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-14 10:05                 ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-15 16:22                   ` Chong Li
2016-03-15 16:41                     ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-15 17:22                       ` Chong Li
2016-03-16  3:14                         ` Meng Xu
2016-03-16  3:32                           ` Chong Li
2016-03-16  3:43                             ` Meng Xu
2016-03-16  8:23                               ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-16 14:37                                 ` Meng Xu
2016-03-16 14:46                                   ` Chong Li
2016-03-16 14:53                                   ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-16 14:46                                 ` Chong Li
2016-03-16 14:54                                   ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-16 10:48                               ` Jan Beulich
2016-03-10 22:35     ` Chong Li
2016-03-10 22:50       ` Wei Liu
2016-03-14  9:07         ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-06 17:55 ` [PATCH v6 for Xen 4.7 2/4] libxc: " Chong Li
2016-03-08 19:09   ` Wei Liu
2016-03-08 19:32     ` Chong Li
2016-03-08 19:36       ` Wei Liu
2016-03-06 17:55 ` [PATCH v6 for Xen 4.7 3/4] libxl: " Chong Li
2016-03-08 19:12   ` Wei Liu
2016-03-09  0:38     ` Chong Li
2016-03-09 14:01       ` Wei Liu
2016-03-09 17:28     ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-09 21:57       ` Chong Li
2016-03-09 17:09   ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-09 17:28     ` Dario Faggioli
2016-03-06 17:55 ` [PATCH v6 for Xen 4.7 4/4] xl: " Chong Li
2016-03-08 19:12   ` Wei Liu
2016-03-08 21:24     ` Chong Li
2016-03-09 14:01       ` Wei Liu
2016-03-09 14:09   ` Wei Liu

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=56DD894802000078000D9F84@prv-mh.provo.novell.com \
    --to=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=chong.li@wustl.edu \
    --cc=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
    --cc=dgolomb@seas.upenn.edu \
    --cc=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=lichong659@gmail.com \
    --cc=mengxu@cis.upenn.edu \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
    --cc=xisisu@gmail.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).