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] cpuidle-haltpoll: Enable kvm guest polling when dedicated
 physical CPUs are available
To:     Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
References: <1564643196-7797-1-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com>
 <7b1e3025-f513-7068-32ac-4830d67b65ac@intel.com>
 <c3fe182f-627f-88ad-cb4d-a4189202b438@redhat.com>
 <20190803202058.GA9316@amt.cnet>
 <CANRm+CwtHBOVWFcn+6Z3Ds7dEcNL2JP+b6hLRS=oeUW98A24MQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Message-ID: <b33a432f-b6a5-e9e8-a744-f29c21c69fd8@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Aug 2019 09:55:16 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANRm+CwtHBOVWFcn+6Z3Ds7dEcNL2JP+b6hLRS=oeUW98A24MQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 13/08/19 02:55, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> I think KVM_HINTS_REALTIME is being abused somewhat.
>> It has no clear meaning and used in different locations
>> for different purposes.
> 
> Now it disables pv queued spinlock, pv tlb shootdown, pv sched yield
> which are not expected present in vCPUs are never preempted for an
> unlimited time scenario.

Guest side polling definitely matches the purpose of KVM_HINTS_REALTIME.
 While host-side polling is conditional on single_task_running, this is
obviously not true of guest-side polling.

The alternative would be to enable it only if KVM_FEATURE_POLL_CONTROL
is available, but I prefer Wanpeng's patch.

Paolo

>> For example, i think that using pv queued spinlocks and
>> haltpoll is a desired scenario, which the patch below disallows.
> 
> So even if dedicated pCPU is available, pv queued spinlocks should
> still be chose if something like vhost-kthreads are used instead of
> DPDK/vhost-user. kvm adaptive halt-polling will compete with
> vhost-kthreads, however, poll in guest unaware other runnable tasks in
> the host which will defeat vhost-kthreads.
> 
> Regards,
> Wanpeng Li
>