Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1618728
| From | Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: use kvm_{test,clear}_request instead of {test,clear}_bit |
| Date | 2017-04-07 14:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ttBbA-70Z-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <ttmcx-5J2-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <ttmcy-5J2-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <ttzMt-5ZH-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
2017-04-07 12:55+0200, Christian Borntraeger:
> On 04/06/2017 10:20 PM, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> static inline bool kvm_check_request(int req, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>> - if (test_bit(req, &vcpu->requests)) {
>> - clear_bit(req, &vcpu->requests);
>> + if (kvm_test_request(req, vcpu)) {
>> + kvm_clear_request(req, vcpu);
>
> This looks fine. I am just asking myself why we do not use
> test_and_clear_bit? Do we expect gcc to merge all test bits as
> a fast path? This does not seem to work as far as I can tell and
> almost everybody does a fast path like in
test_and_clear_bit() is a slower operation even if the test is false (at
least on x86), because it needs to be fully atomic.
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:
> if (!vcpu->requests)
> return 0;
>
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:
> if (vcpu->requests) {
We'll mostly have only one request set, so splitting the test_and_clear
improves the performance of many subsequent tests_and_clear()s even if
the compiler doesn't optimize.
GCC couldn't even optimize if we used test_and_clear_bit(), because that
instruction adds barriers, but the forward check for vcpu->requests is
there because we do not trust the optimizer to do it for us and it would
make a big difference.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 0/6] KVM: towards maintainable kvm_make_all_cpus_request() Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2017-04-06 22:30 +0200
[PATCH 4/6] KVM: remove #ifndef CONFIG_S390 around kvm_vcpu_wake_up Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2017-04-06 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 4/6] KVM: remove #ifndef CONFIG_S390 around kvm_vcpu_wake_up Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2017-04-07 13:10 +0200
[PATCH RFC 1/6] KVM: fix guest_mode optimization in kvm_make_all_cpus_request() Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2017-04-06 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] KVM: fix guest_mode optimization in kvm_make_all_cpus_request() James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com> - 2017-04-06 23:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] KVM: fix guest_mode optimization in kvm_make_all_cpus_request() Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2017-04-07 12:50 +0200
[PATCH 3/6] KVM: x86: use kvm_make_request instead of set_bit Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2017-04-06 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 3/6] KVM: x86: use kvm_make_request instead of set_bit David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> - 2017-04-07 10:20 +0200
[PATCH 6/6] KVM: perform a wake_up in kvm_make_all_cpus_request Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2017-04-06 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 6/6] KVM: perform a wake_up in kvm_make_all_cpus_request Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com> - 2017-04-10 13:20 +0200
[PATCH 2/6] KVM: use kvm_{test,clear}_request instead of {test,clear}_bit Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2017-04-06 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: use kvm_{test,clear}_request instead of {test,clear}_bit Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2017-04-07 13:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: use kvm_{test,clear}_request instead of {test,clear}_bit Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2017-04-07 14:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: use kvm_{test,clear}_request instead of {test,clear}_bit Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2017-04-07 16:10 +0200
csiph-web