lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 答复 : [PATCH] KVM: Consider SMT idle status when halt polling
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021, Li,Rongqing wrote:
> > > > SMT siblings share caches and other hardware, halt polling will
> > > > degrade its sibling performance if its sibling is busy
> > >
> > > Do you have any real scenario benefits? As the polling nature, some
> > > cloud providers will configure to their preferred balance of cpu usage
> > > and performance, and other cloud providers for their NFV scenarios
> > > which are more sensitive to latency are vCPU and pCPU 1:1 pin,you
> > > destroy these setups.
> > >
> > > Wanpeng
> >
>
>
> Run a copy (single thread) Unixbench, with or without a busy poll program in
> its SMT sibling, and Unixbench score can lower 1/3 with SMT busy polling
> program

Rather than disallowing halt-polling entirely, on x86 it should be sufficient to
simply have the hardware thread yield to its sibling(s) via PAUSE. It probably
won't get back all performance, but I would expect it to be close.

This compiles on all KVM architectures, and AFAICT the intended usage of
cpu_relax() is identical for all architectures.

diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 6980dabe9df5..a07ecb3c67fb 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -3111,6 +3111,7 @@ void kvm_vcpu_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
goto out;
}
poll_end = cur = ktime_get();
+ cpu_relax();
} while (kvm_vcpu_can_poll(cur, stop));
}

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-27 03:26    [W:0.087 / U:3.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site