From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753451AbdKIRPT (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2017 12:15:19 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:39242 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753389AbdKIRPQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2017 12:15:16 -0500 Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 18:15:11 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Radim Krcmar Cc: Pankaj Gupta , Wanpeng Li , Eduardo Valentin , Paolo Bonzini , Matt Wilson , Jonathan Corbet , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , the arch/x86 maintainers , Waiman Long , kvm , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Jan H . Schoenherr" , Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/1] locking/qspinlock/x86: Avoid test-and-set when PV_DEDICATED is set Message-ID: <20171109171511.gckh2lt7xksmiern@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1509999980-10828-1-git-send-email-eduval@amazon.com> <789734192.29237413.1510242805535.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <20171109160536.GE20859@flask> <20171109161701.y3eqqrvs5jpg46lr@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20171109164523.GF20859@flask> <20171109171241.43zpahj24mhzzp3y@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171109171241.43zpahj24mhzzp3y@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 06:12:41PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 05:45:23PM +0100, Radim Krcmar wrote: > > 2017-11-09 17:17+0100, Peter Zijlstra: > > > On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0100, Radim Krcmar wrote: > > > > 2017-11-09 10:53-0500, Pankaj Gupta: > > > > > 2] PV TLB should also behave as per option PV_DEDICATED for better performance. > > > > > > > > Right, > > > > > > Shouldn't KVM do flush_tlb_other() in any case? Not sure how > > > PV_DEDICATED can help with that. > > > > It will, the suggestion was based on recent extension of the > > flush_tlb_others implementaion, https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/8/1146. > > > > PV_TLB_FLUSH allows a guest to set a flush bit instead of sending flush > > IPI if the target VCPU is not running. This would be a waste of time > > with PV_DEDICATED as all VCPUs are expected to always running. > > > > With PV_DEDICATED, the guest should keep using native_flush_tlb_others. > > Is saving that for_each_cpu() really worth the effort compared to the > cost of actually doing the IPIs and CR3 write? > > Also, you should not put cpumask_t on stack, that's 'broken'. Also, you'll want to use __cpumask_clear_cpu() there.