Received: by 2002:ac0:98c7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id g7-v6csp6357677imd; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 10:26:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5e5IcZdGp4yXQMFHQ5fIJrVnjaUNMHCzyVVnqcUd7H3te61LqLCIuY+BSND4im61TGlVxiv X-Received: by 2002:a62:2ec3:: with SMTP id u186-v6mr4262934pfu.189.1541006765378; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 10:26:05 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1541006765; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=M8AORdbLG8nEkwNik5zizWeEWAQ5fPqoJjIdZ0zZjDICISpGD6nafuEVJWd+SHAqyq yEni5G0eT9cXgvy7/BB5sTcwv4+Es+16JCHqx2EMs5HkLOWeusDtXi5kzY2/iNiY+FR3 f3g3eRdPhcJAf49cm+ePbWChG6c4wg3syhAg6HYZNO+oY95TIc6C/BeaOD34r2gvt3Nv ZvWTwNR/cnbnz4FLub3Mbf5q0OiYmSVVAiymeBUH4Oc2VnWbCfvyNZdGzmid+J7VHu4N jDHciEzubjw1Lm5N4v8MJhruaaEYWKInAC8J0v8YZS+TS1Nv7hwxXDR/smcdK6RQ5Obb /Osw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=B7KdEnxBUq3ii7jZp5HTJbBVHv7VRaLUdPsX+lr56Kw=; b=SjID35DXfNa7+4cotwl6yvgRHzE8kxtoREQ5c5G1XRMOPWc8Gqkcg5utgPmmLLC/US 1Xa7eA0IAV7L+p3Vuutwp+Ix9k4Q/YhO/iWYLYIOYGT9vI0GU+rznZKfq7opozPsf+Wb MgLIxoYkNAZFiSUDn60cK3qepNIWp0eTljQXsYWqewDCOr10KK2BK2wyHzJTI0w20Zg6 3IUviWiS60HbV40bAKpi91J7dY2rsauAxGQgN4HqwllpBXU84pPM8xzVmhd8R1aI9pkW BT77PzEVVCxrLMa0v1Dr4VK8L2CVKySgzxEprMF3GXkZbTep6wvlH++4nq1pYixHZo0F CHQA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@infradead.org header.s=merlin.20170209 header.b=AOgWn50h; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y8-v6si2695607pgp.292.2018.10.31.10.25.49; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 10:26:05 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@infradead.org header.s=merlin.20170209 header.b=AOgWn50h; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729713AbeKACOs (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 31 Oct 2018 22:14:48 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:41004 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728128AbeKACOr (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2018 22:14:47 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=B7KdEnxBUq3ii7jZp5HTJbBVHv7VRaLUdPsX+lr56Kw=; b=AOgWn50hpZlEFFnKwbbC7K4iD itrBUcWXDvY/6tYpwvgHj4nfwy7hhOvHlgdTr4Z+WuSCkBW78prAyKwbaDMQPZ3P0/q8DW6BfUZPw G9VxJ9L2roEM3DuSrzzTeFSZHNf7pvsUWhTrG4ZL3R2Wce+lVKj1HLIT4UgXanmndzCN42qzStaRK xngVlEC54Iih6J6dDWiIXko3Mh1DzIrsKZMGQYAavU29xKKy20unTqCrH58tLeKoGu87Xvd7AUSgj 89dCwOp1/Sz1VNO+i2TXT4uZYN/mnY4PsBi50XfPdFUm/OLAs7I32HwkFntZGK7KrLZcoAwoXfQ+G Q5uaR+lnA==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gHu5m-0005Zi-Es; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 17:15:43 +0000 Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0B4C52029F87F; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 18:15:39 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 18:15:39 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Waiman Long Cc: Yi Sun , Juergen Gross , 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" , Haiyang Zhang , Stephen Hemminger , "mingo@redhat.com" , Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] x86/hyperv: make HvNotifyLongSpinWait hypercall Message-ID: <20181031171538.GC13219@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20181022015342.GK11769@yi.y.sun> <2e0d62cb-b706-a5b4-65f7-982a913fb32b@suse.com> <20181022171516.GH3117@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20181023025740.GL11769@yi.y.sun> <20181023085127.GG3109@worktop.c.hoisthospitality.com> <20181023093328.GA15378@yi.y.sun> <20181031015417.GC15378@yi.y.sun> <20181031141030.GB13219@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:07:22AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 10/31/2018 10:10 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 09:54:17AM +0800, Yi Sun wrote: > >> On 18-10-23 17:33:28, Yi Sun wrote: > >>> On 18-10-23 10:51:27, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >>>> Can you try and explain why vcpu_is_preempted() doesn't work for you? > >>> I thought HvSpinWaitInfo is used to notify hypervisor the spin number > >>> which is different with vcpu_is_preempted. So I did not consider > >>> vcpu_is_preempted. > >>> > >>> But HvSpinWaitInfo is a quite simple function and could be combined > >>> with vcpu_is_preempted together. So I think it is OK to use > >>> vcpu_is_preempted to make codes clean. I will have a try. > >> After checking codes, there is one issue to call vcpu_is_preempted. > >> There are two spin loops in qspinlock_paravirt.h. One loop in > >> 'pv_wait_node' calls vcpu_is_preempted. But another loop in > >> 'pv_wait_head_or_lock' does not call vcpu_is_preempted. It also does > >> not call any other ops of 'pv_lock_ops' in the loop. So I am afraid > >> we have to add one more ops in 'pv_lock_ops' to do this. > > Why? Would not something like the below cure that? Waiman, can you have > > a look at this; I always forget how that paravirt crud works. > > There are two major reasons why the vcpu_is_preempt() test isn't done at > pv_wait_head_or_lock(). First of all, we may not have a valid prev > pointer after all if it is the first one to enter the queue while the > lock is busy. Secondly, because of lock stealing, the cpu number pointed > by a valid prev pointer may not be the actual cpu that is currently > holding the lock. Another minor reason is that we want to minimize the > lock transfer latency and so don't want to sleep too early while waiting > at the queue head. So Yi, are you actually seeing a problem? If so, can you give details?