Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <99e0b6bf-a8ba-85d8-a9ff-b996daba9049@efficios.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:52:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.4.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/24] sched: Introduce per memory space current
 virtual cpu id
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>, David.Laight@aculab.com,
        carlos@redhat.com, Peter Oskolkov <posk@posk.io>,
        Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander@mihalicyn.com>,
        Chris Kennelly <ckennelly@google.com>
References: <20221103200359.328736-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
 <20221103200359.328736-9-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
 <CALCETrW1doHX3=za+KDuB=4y+wHsnaZpVkDP3OhZXGrQU2iffw@mail.gmail.com>
 <2f191ddb-de89-52c0-e7da-26ac0239b8fe@efficios.com>
 <Y3KpxR4ABRxvD+kj@google.com>
 <273f4883-25bc-44ad-9c35-3950ca8a3fcf@efficios.com>
 <Y3aHMTNv0yiyHCun@google.com>
 <a1b401e7-cbfa-0add-17fe-ebb2ae54850c@efficios.com>
 <Y3akhjmJEcD0nDK/@google.com>
 <468f2595-e9e4-a195-05eb-bae7f42db4b3@efficios.com>
In-Reply-To: <468f2595-e9e4-a195-05eb-bae7f42db4b3@efficios.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2022-11-21 14:00, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> On 2022-11-17 16:15, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>> On 2022-11-17 14:10, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-11-14 15:49, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2022, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-11-10 23:41, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 1:05 PM Mathieu Desnoyers
>>>>>>>> <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Also, in my mind "virtual cpu" is vCPU, which this isn't.  Maybe
>>>>>>>> "compacted cpu" or something?  It's a strange sort of concept.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've kept the same wording that has been introduced in 2011 by 
>>>>>>> Paul Turner
>>>>>>> and used internally at Google since then, although it may be 
>>>>>>> confusing if
>>>>>>> people expect kvm-vCPU and rseq-vcpu to mean the same thing. Both 
>>>>>>> really end
>>>>>>> up providing the semantic of a virtually assigned cpu id (in 
>>>>>>> opposition to
>>>>>>> the logical cpu id on the system), but this is much more involved 
>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>> case of KVM.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had the same reaction as Andy.  The rseq concepts don't worry me 
>>>>>> so much as the
>>>>>> existence of "vcpu" in mm_struct/task_struct, e.g. 
>>>>>> switch_mm_vcpu() when switching
>>>>>> between KVM vCPU tasks is going to be super confusing.  Ditto for 
>>>>>> mm_vcpu_get()
>>>>>> and mm_vcpu_put() in the few cases where KVM currently does 
>>>>>> mmget()/mmput().
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm fine with changing the wording if it helps make things less 
>>>>> confusing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Should we go for "compact-cpu-id" ? "packed-cpu-id" ? Other ideas ?
>>>>
>>>> What about something like "process-local-cpu-id" to capture that the 
>>>> ID has meaning
>>>> only within the associated address space / process?
>>>
>>> Considering that the shorthand for "memory space" is "VM" in e.g. 
>>> "CLONE_VM"
>>
>> No objection from me for "vm", I've already had to untrain myself and 
>> remember
>> that "vm" doesn't always mean "virtual machine" :-)
>>
>>> clone(2) flags, perhaps "vm-cpu-id", "vm-local-cpu-id" or 
>>> "per-vm-cpu-id" ?
>>
>> I have a slight preference for vm-local-cpu-id, but any of 'em work 
>> for me.
> 
> Taking a step back wrt naming (because if I do a name change across the 
> series, I want it to be the last time I do it):
> 
> - VM (kvm) vs vm_ (rseq) is confusing.
> - vCPU (kvm) vs vcpu (rseq) is confusing.
> 
> I propose "Address Space Concurrency ID". This indicates that those IDs 
> are really just tags assigned uniquely within an address space for each 
> thread running concurrently (and only while they are running).
> 
> Then the question that arises is whether the abbreviation presented to 
> user-space should be "mm_cid" (as would be expected from an internal 
> implementation perspective) or "as_cid" (which would match the name 
> exposed to user-space) ?

Or it could be "Memory Map Concurrency ID" (mm_cid) to have matching 
abbreviation and naming. The notion of a "memory map" seems to be seen 
in a few places in man pages, and there are event tools to explore 
process memory maps (pmap(1)).

Thanks,

Mathieu


> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mathieu
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com