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 <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
"dario.faggioli" <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
Meng Xu <mengxu@cis.upenn.edu>,
Dagaen Golomb <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 09:40:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56DDBCFF02000078000DA1A0@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGHO-irYG5QXpaTwNzt+JzqdRwaTSu0e5d+xrU_A0_aCHT685g@mail.gmail.com>
>>> On 07.03.16 at 17:28, <lichong659@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 06.03.16 at 18:55, <lichong659@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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.
>
> Based on previous discussion, XEN_DOMCTL_SCHEDOP_getinfo only returns
> the default parameters,
> no matter whether vcpu is created yet or not. But I can absolutely
> explain this in the description.
That wasn't the point of the comment. Instead the change (fix) to
divide by MICROSECS(1) is what otherwise would go in silently.
>>> @@ -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)?
>
> Dario suggested this in the last post, because vcpus is a handle and
> needs to be validated.
Well, as said - the handle being non-null doesn't make it a valid
handle. Any validation can be left to copy_{to,from}_guest*()
unless you mean to give a null handle some special meaning.
>>> + {
>>> + 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?
>
> In libxc, we re-issue hypercall if the current one is preempted.
And with the current code - how does libxc know? (And anyway,
this should only be a last resort, if the hypervisor can't by itself
arrange for a continuation. If done this way, having a code
comment referring to the required caller behavior would seem to
be an absolute must.)
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + 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.
>
> The right side is to check whether the vcpus array is fully processed.
> When it is true and no error occurs (rc == 0), we
> update op->u.v.nr_vcpus, which is returned to libxc, and helps xc
> function figuring out how many un-processed vcpus should
> be taken care of in the next hypercall.
Just consider what the contents of op->u.v.nr_vcpus is after
this piece of code was executed, once with the full conditional,
and another time with the right side of the && omitted.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-07 16:40 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
2016-03-07 16:28 ` Chong Li
2016-03-07 16:40 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
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=56DDBCFF02000078000DA1A0@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).