Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1276514

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d posted-interrupts

From Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d posted-interrupts
Date 2015-11-24 15:40 +0100
Message-ID <qymVb-Ro-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <qsL0d-Bm-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qvxk6-2PK-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <qyaAG-1iQ-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


2015-11-24 01:26+0000, Wu, Feng:
> "I don't think we do any vector hashing on our client parts.  This may be why the customer is not able to detect this on Skylake client silicon.
> The vector hashing is micro-architectural and something we had done on server parts.
> 
> If you look at the haswell server CPU spec (https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/xeon-e5-v3-datasheet-vol-2.pdf)
> In section 4.1.2, you will see an IntControl register (this is a register controlled/configured by BIOS) - see below.

Thank you!

> If you look at bits 6:4 in that register, you see the option we offer in hardware for what kind of redirection is applied to lowest priority interrupts.
> There are three options:
> 1.	Fixed priority  
> 2.	Redirect last 
> 3.	Hash Vector
> 
> If picking vector hash, then bits 10:8 specifies the APIC-ID bits used for the hashing."

The hash function just interprets a subset of vector's bits as a number
and uses that as a starting offset in a search for an enabled APIC
within the destination set?

For example:
The x2APIC destination is 0x00000055 (= first four even APICs in cluster
0), the vector is 0b11100000, and bits 10:8 of IntControl are 000.

000 means that bits 7:4 of vector are selected, thus the vector hash is
0b1110 = 14, so the round-robin effectively does 14 % 4 (because we only
have 4 destinations) and delivers to the 3rd possible APIC (= ID 6)?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2015-11-16 20:10 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2015-11-17 10:50 +0100
    RE: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@intel.com> - 2015-11-24 02:30 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Radim Krcmár <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2015-11-24 15:40 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2015-11-24 15:40 +0100
          RE: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@intel.com> - 2015-11-25 03:00 +0100
            Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2015-11-25 12:40 +0100
  RE: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@intel.com> - 2015-11-24 02:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2015-11-24 15:40 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2015-11-24 15:50 +0100
      RE: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@intel.com> - 2015-11-25 04:30 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Radim Krcmár <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2015-11-25 15:20 +0100
          Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2015-11-25 15:40 +0100
            Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2015-11-25 16:50 +0100
              RE: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts "Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@intel.com> - 2015-11-26 07:30 +0100
                Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add lowest-priority support for vt-d  posted-interrupts Radim Krcmár <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2015-11-26 15:10 +0100

csiph-web