lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH RESEND] KVM: Boosting vCPUs that are delivering interrupts
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 16:34, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 18/07/19 10:15, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 18.07.19 09:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 12/07/19 09:15, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> >>> index b4ab59d..2c46705 100644
> >>> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> >>> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> >>> @@ -2404,8 +2404,10 @@ void kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >>> int me;
> >>> int cpu = vcpu->cpu;
> >>>
> >>> - if (kvm_vcpu_wake_up(vcpu))
> >>> + if (kvm_vcpu_wake_up(vcpu)) {
> >>> + vcpu->preempted = true;
> >>> return;
> >>> + }
> >>>
> >>> me = get_cpu();
> >>> if (cpu != me && (unsigned)cpu < nr_cpu_ids && cpu_online(cpu))
> >>>
> >>
> >> Who is resetting vcpu->preempted to false in this case? This also
> >> applies to s390 in fact.
> >
> > Isnt that done by the sched_in handler?
>
> I am a bit confused because, if it is done by the sched_in later, I
> don't understand why the sched_out handler hasn't set vcpu->preempted
> already.
>
> The s390 commit message is not very clear, but it talks about "a former
> sleeping cpu" that "gave up the cpu voluntarily". Does "voluntarily"
> that mean it is in kvm_vcpu_block? But then at least for x86 it would

see the prepare_to_swait_exlusive() in kvm_vcpu_block(), the task will
be set in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE state, kvm_sched_out will set
vcpu->preempted to true iff current->state == TASK_RUNNING.

Regards,
Wanpeng Li

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-18 10:44    [W:0.048 / U:18.328 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site