> On 19/08/14 14:14, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> Il 19/08/2014 13:28, David Hildenbrand ha scritto: > >>> Looking at the code, kvm_cpu_synchronize_state() seems to do these ioctls > >>> in > >>> the vcpu thread (e.g. comming from cpu_synchronize_all_states()), any > >>> reasons > >>> why kvm_cpu_synchronize_post_reset() doesn't do the same (e.g. called from > >>> cpu_synchronize_all_post_reset())? > >> > >> No reason, feel free to post a patch for QEMU kvm-all.c. > >> Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt clearly says: > >> > >> Only run vcpu ioctls from the same thread that was used to create the > >> vcpu. > >> > >> Paolo > >> > > > > Thanks! A little more tweaking in the other parts of s390x resets > > and we should be able to reduce the number of "wrong" ioctls (I think I > > found > > most cases that are responsible for the performance degradation). > > Hmm. We want to not only reduce, we want them be zero. > In addition to a reworked MP_STATE patch set, we might be able to change the > code to call "KVM_S390_INITIAL_RESET" only from the cpu thread itself. > If that simplifies things, we could avoid doing KVM_S390_INITIAL_RESET on CPU > creation, because we know that all kernel version will do an implicit cpu > reset on cpu creation anyway. Can you have a try on this as well when > reworking that code? We could then fix this rcu performance penalty > independent from getting rid of that ioctl. > > Christian >
Already working on it, only one ioctl left on vcpu creation that is called from wrong context, trying to hide from me. Restarts and resets are already blasting fast. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
