lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] kvm hypervisor : Add hypercalls to support pv-ticketlock
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 09:56:27AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > The key here is not to
> > sleep when waiting for locks (as implemented by current patch-series, which can
> > put other VMs at an advantage by giving them more time than they are entitled
> > to)
>
> Why? If a VCPU can't make progress because its waiting for some
> resource, then why not schedule something else instead?

In the process, "something else" can get more share of cpu resource than its
entitled to and that's where I was bit concerned. I guess one could
employ hard-limits to cap "something else's" bandwidth where it is of real
concern (like clouds).

> Presumably when
> the VCPU does become runnable, the scheduler will credit its previous
> blocked state and let it run in preference to something else.

which may not be sufficient for it to gain back bandwidth lost while blocked
(speaking of mainline scheduler atleast).

> > Is there a way we can dynamically expand the size of lock only upon contention
> > to include additional information like owning vcpu? Have the lock point to a
> > per-cpu area upon contention where additional details can be stored perhaps?
>
> As soon as you add a pointer to the lock, you're increasing its size.

I didn't really mean to expand size statically. Rather have some bits of the
lock word store pointer to a per-cpu area when there is contention (somewhat
similar to how bits of rt_mutex.owner are used). I haven't thought thr' this in
detail to see if that is possible though.

- vatsa


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-21 15:05    [W:0.126 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site