Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] x86/hyperv: make HvNotifyLongSpinWait hypercall
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, Yi Sun <yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
        chao.p.peng@intel.com, chao.gao@intel.com,
        isaku.yamahata@intel.com, michael.h.kelley@microsoft.com,
        tianyu.lan@microsoft.com, "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
References: <1539954835-34035-1-git-send-email-yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>
 <1539954835-34035-3-git-send-email-yi.y.sun@linux.intel.com>
 <bab010e9-a122-95f1-d8cc-790e56c72716@suse.com>
 <20181022015342.GK11769@yi.y.sun>
 <2e0d62cb-b706-a5b4-65f7-982a913fb32b@suse.com>
 <ba75b994-c1a6-6e91-6499-b9af90636fcf@redhat.com>
 <20181022171516.GH3117@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <6d8095c0-af95-5967-3ca5-2ceeb74233ea@redhat.com>
 <20181022173144.GB3109@worktop.c.hoisthospitality.com>
From:   Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat
Message-ID: <0f36b234-fa4e-d52f-735c-078ddeab6720@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Oct 2018 14:01:47 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20181022173144.GB3109@worktop.c.hoisthospitality.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 10/22/2018 01:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 01:27:27PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>
>>>> I agree with Juergen on that. I would suggest rename the
>>>> vcpu_is_preempted hook into a more generic vcpu_stop_spinning, perhaps,
>>>> so different hypervisors can act on the information accordingly. Adding
>>>> an extra parameter is fine.
>>> No; no extra parameters. vcpu_is_preempted() is a simple and intuitive
>>> interface. Why would we want to make it complicated?
>> Hyperv seems to do it in a somewhat different way by looking at the spin
>> counter and decide if it should continue. I don't know why they do that
>> and what advantage it has.
>>
>> The current patch is definitely not OK. A revised patch that makes use
>> of an existing paravirt hook will be more acceptable. Again, I would
>> like to see some performance figure and why they do it this way to see
>> if it is worthwhile to change the existing interface.
> Note that there are vcpu_is_preempted() users that are not in a
> spin-loop.

You are right. I forgot about that. In that case, someone has to prove
that using an alternative way to stop spinning really has a performance
advantage compared to what we already have today.

Cheers,
Longman