Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1403816
| From | Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon |
| Date | 2016-05-19 17:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rAymZ-1DD-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <rAwEx-vI-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <rAxAC-16l-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <rAxAD-16l-41@gated-at.bofh.it> <rAxKi-1oW-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <rAxKi-1oW-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 05/19/2016 05:06 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 19/05/2016 17:03, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >>>> Would this work too and be simpler? >>>> Hmm, your patch does only fiddle with the grow/shrink logic (which might >>>> be a good idea independently of this change), but the original patch >>>> actually takes into account that we have a guaranteed maximum time by a >>>> wakeup timer - IOW we know exactly what the maximum poll time is. >>> >>> Yes, it's different. The question is whether a 10us poll (40,000 clock >>> cycles) has an impact even if it's sometimes wrong. >> >> Valid question. As I said, this change might be something good independent from >> the original patch. (it might make it unnecessary, though) On the other hand >> I can handle ~30 guest entry/exit cycles of a simple exit like diag9c. >> Needs measurement. > > Actually I'm okay with the original patch, and especially on s390 where > the maximum poll time is small it may make a bigger difference. Though > I suppose the timer interrupt is not floating? Right its cpu local. So a timer wakeup would be considered valid (if the timer kicks in before the poll ends - the poll does also check if the timer expires and maybe the hrtimer is a bit late. > > Since it's not 4.7 material, I'll wait for your experiments and David's > remarks. I will try to get both patches scheduled but it might take a while.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 15:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-05-19 15:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-05-19 16:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-05-19 17:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-05-19 17:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-05-19 17:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-05-19 17:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-05-19 17:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 04:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> - 2016-05-19 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> - 2016-05-19 20:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 04:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 08:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> - 2016-05-20 20:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 03:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> - 2016-05-23 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 03:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> - 2016-05-24 03:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: halt-polling: poll if emulated lapic timer will fire soon Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 05:00 +0200
csiph-web