From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Boost queue head vCPU to mitigate lock waiter preemption
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:17:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5ffaea5b-fb07-0141-cab8-6dce39071abe@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1563961393-10301-1-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com>
On 24/07/19 11:43, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
>
> Commit 11752adb (locking/pvqspinlock: Implement hybrid PV queued/unfair locks)
> introduces hybrid PV queued/unfair locks
> - queued mode (no starvation)
> - unfair mode (good performance on not heavily contended lock)
> The lock waiter goes into the unfair mode especially in VMs with over-commit
> vCPUs since increaing over-commitment increase the likehood that the queue
> head vCPU may have been preempted and not actively spinning.
>
> However, reschedule queue head vCPU timely to acquire the lock still can get
> better performance than just depending on lock stealing in over-subscribe
> scenario.
>
> Testing on 80 HT 2 socket Xeon Skylake server, with 80 vCPUs VM 80GB RAM:
> ebizzy -M
> vanilla boosting improved
> 1VM 23520 25040 6%
> 2VM 8000 13600 70%
> 3VM 3100 5400 74%
>
> The lock holder vCPU yields to the queue head vCPU when unlock, to boost queue
> head vCPU which is involuntary preemption or the one which is voluntary halt
> due to fail to acquire the lock after a short spin in the guest.
Clever! I have applied the patch.
Paolo
> Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 01e18ca..c6d951c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -7206,7 +7206,7 @@ static void kvm_sched_yield(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long dest_id)
>
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
> - if (target)
> + if (target && READ_ONCE(target->ready))
> kvm_vcpu_yield_to(target);
> }
>
> @@ -7246,6 +7246,7 @@ int kvm_emulate_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> break;
> case KVM_HC_KICK_CPU:
> kvm_pv_kick_cpu_op(vcpu->kvm, a0, a1);
> + kvm_sched_yield(vcpu->kvm, a1);
> ret = 0;
> break;
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-24 12:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-24 9:43 Wanpeng Li
2019-07-24 12:17 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2021-08-13 8:34 ` Lai Jiangshan
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=5ffaea5b-fb07-0141-cab8-6dce39071abe@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®