On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 11:33:01AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > 2018-03-24 4:18 GMT+08:00 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 07:36:42AM -0700, Wanpeng Li wrote: > >> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> This patch adds support for KVM_CAP_X86_DISABLE_EXITS. Provides userspace with > >> per-VM capability(KVM_CAP_X86_DISABLE_EXITS) to not intercept MWAIT/HLT/PAUSE > >> in order that to improve latency in some workloads. > >> > >> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Patch looks good (except for comment below), but I would like to > > see QEMU documentation mentioning what exactly are the practical > > consequences of setting "+kvm-hint-dedicated" (especially what > > could happen if people enable the flag without properly > > configuring vCPU pinning). > > > > > > [...] > >> + if (env->features[FEAT_KVM_HINTS] & KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED) { > >> + int disable_exits = kvm_check_extension(cs->kvm_state, KVM_CAP_X86_DISABLE_EXITS); > >> + if (disable_exits) { > >> + disable_exits &= (KVM_X86_DISABLE_EXITS_MWAIT | > >> + KVM_X86_DISABLE_EXITS_HLT | > >> + KVM_X86_DISABLE_EXITS_PAUSE); > >> + } > > > > Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt says that KVM_FEATURE_PV_UNHALT > > shouldn't be enabled if disabling HLT exits. This needs to be > > handled by QEMU. > > This is handled by KVM(in kvm_update_cpuid()) currently to avoid kvm > userspace doing something crazy. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git/commit/?h=queue&id=caa057a2cad647fb368a12c8e6c410ac4c28e063 This seems to disable kvm-pv-unhalt silently if KVM_X86_DISABLE_EXITS_HLT is enabled. We shouldn't do that if the user explicitly requested +kvm-pv-unhalt in the command-line. > > > > > Probably the simplest solution is to not allow kvm-hint-dedicated > > to be enabled if kvm-pv-unhalt is. This should be mentioned in > > QEMU documentation, also, especially considering that we might > > enable kvm-pv-unhalt by default in future QEMU versions. > > As Locking guy Waiman mentioned before: > > Generally speaking, unfair lock performs well for VMs with a small number of vCPUs. Native qspinlock may perform better than pvqspinlock if there is vCPU pinning and there is no vCPU over-commitment. > I think +kvm-hint-dedicated, -kvm-pv-unhalt is more suitable for vCPU > pinning and there is no vCPU over-commitment, on the contrary, > -kvm-hint-dedicated, +kvm-pv-unhalt is more prefer. Disabling kvm-pv-unhalt by default if only "-cpu ...,+kvm-hint-dedicated" is used makes sense. But we still need the system to not silently ignore options if "-cpu ...,+kvm-pv-unhalt,+kvm-hint-dedicated" is specified. -- Eduardo