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


Groups > linux.kernel > #1415798

Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu hotplug

From Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu hotplug
Date 2016-06-07 09:40 +0200
Message-ID <rHjMe-897-25@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <rFzs5-5tU-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rFzBM-5Mk-27@gated-at.bofh.it> <rFBtU-6Tw-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <rH34J-5B9-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rHe09-4kp-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw



On 07/06/2016 03:24, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 15:40 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>> On 02/06/2016 15:59, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>>
>>> If a guest is saved to disk and later restored (eg. after
>>> a host reboot), or live migrated to another host, I would
>>> expect to get totally disjoint steal time statistics from
>>> the "new run" of the guest (which is the same run of the
>>> guest OS).
>> Why?  The preexisting guest steal time is always added to by
>> KVM, so the time won't restart from zero.
>>
>> Continuing the previous count on CPU hot-unplug followed by hot-plug
>> is less obvious, but I think it's overall the right thing to do.
>>
>> In fact, I was going to test a patch this week as simple as this:
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
>> index eea2a6f72b31..1ef5e48b3a36 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c
>> @@ -301,8 +301,6 @@ static void kvm_register_steal_time(void)
>>  	if (!has_steal_clock)
>>  		return;
>>  
>> -	memset(st, 0, sizeof(*st));
>> -
>>  	wrmsrl(MSR_KVM_STEAL_TIME, (slow_virt_to_phys(st) |
>> KVM_MSR_ENABLED));
> 
> By removing the memset from initial bootup allocation,
> can't that cause the steal time to "increase by a ludicrous
> amount" the very first time it is compared with the arch
> independent value in the scheduler code?
> 
> In other words, would removal of the memset result in still
> requiring Wanpeng's patch?

The percpu area is initialized to zero, isn't it?

Paolo

> What am I overlooking?
> 
> Is there something preventing a non-zero value right at
> the beginning?
> 
> Also, is there a chance of ending up with a non-zero bit
> in the seqcount if the memset is removed?
> 

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


Thread

[PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu hotplug Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 14:00 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu  hotplug Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-06-02 14:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during  cpu hotplug Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-06-02 16:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu hotplug Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 07:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu  hotplug Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-06-06 15:50 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu hotplug Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 00:50 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during  cpu hotplug Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-06-07 03:30 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu hotplug Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 09:40 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: add steal clock warps handling during cpu  hotplug Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-06-07 09:40 +0200

csiph-web