Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1726483
| From | Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock |
| Date | 2017-09-05 09:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <umgCL-8ei-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <um0HG-6DI-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <um0Rk-6HY-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <um82t-2P6-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <umfx0-7Ad-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <umg01-7JL-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 05/09/17 08:58, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 08:28:10AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 05/09/17 00:21, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: >>> On Mon, 04 Sep 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> >>>> For testing its trivial to hack your kernel and I don't feel this is >>>> something an Admin can make reasonable decisions about. >>>> >>>> So why? In general less knobs is better. >>> >>> +1. >>> >>> Also, note how b8fa70b51aa (xen, pvticketlocks: Add xen_nopvspin parameter >>> to disable xen pv ticketlocks) has no justification as to why its wanted >>> in the first place. The only thing I could find was from 15a3eac0784 >>> (xen/spinlock: Document the xen_nopvspin parameter): >>> >>> "Useful for diagnosing issues and comparing benchmarks in over-commit >>> CPU scenarios." >> >> Hmm, I think I should clarify the Xen knob, as I was the one requesting >> it: >> >> In my previous employment we had a configuration where dom0 ran >> exclusively on a dedicated set of physical cpus. We experienced >> scalability problems when doing I/O performance tests: with a decent >> number of dom0 cpus we achieved throughput of 700 MB/s with only 20% >> cpu load in dom0. A higher dom0 cpu count let the throughput drop to >> about 150 MB/s and cpu load was up to 100%. Reason was the additional >> load due to hypervisor interactions on a high frequency lock. >> >> So in special configurations at least for Xen the knob is useful for >> production environment. > > So the problem with qspinlock is that it will revert to a classic > test-and-set spinlock if you don't do paravirt but are running a HV. In the Xen case we just use the bare metal settings when xen_nopvspin has been specified. So paravirt, but without modifying any pv_lock_ops functions. Juergen > > And test-and-set is unfair and has all kinds of ugly starvation cases, > esp on slightly bigger hardware. > > So if we'd want to cater to the 1:1 virt case, we'll need to come up > with something else. _IF_ it is an issue of course. >
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> - 2017-09-04 16:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-09-04 16:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> - 2017-09-04 21:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2017-09-05 00:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-09-05 08:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-09-05 09:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-09-05 09:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-09-05 10:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-09-05 10:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-09-05 11:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-09-05 11:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2017-09-05 11:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-09-05 10:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> - 2017-09-05 09:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH resend] x86,kvm: Add a kernel parameter to disable PV spinlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-09-05 10:10 +0200
csiph-web