Re: [patch] x86: kvm: Convert i8254/i8259 locks to raw_spinlocks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 02/18/2010 11:45 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/18/2010 11:40 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:

Meanwhile, if anyone has any idea how to kill this lock, I'd love to see it.

What concurrency does it resolve in the end? On first glance, it only
synchronize the fiddling with pre-VCPU request bits, right? What forces
us to do this? Wouldn't it suffice to disable preemption (thus
migration) and the let concurrent requests race for setting the bits? I
mean if some request bit was already set on entry, we don't include the
  related VCPU in smp_call_function_many anyway.

It's more difficult.

vcpu 0: sets request bit on vcpu 2
          vcpu 1: test_and_set request bit on vcpu 2, returns already set
          vcpu 1: returns
vcpu 0: sends IPI
vcpu 0: returns

so vcpu 1 returns before the IPI was performed. If the request was a tlb flush, for example, vcpu 1 may free a page that is still in vcpu 2's tlb.

One way out would be to have a KVM_REQ_IN_PROGRESS, set it in make_request, clear it in the IPI function.

If a second make_request sees it already set, it can simply busy wait until it is cleared, without sending the IPI. Of course the busy wait means we can't enable preemption (or we may busy wait on an unscheduled task), but at least the requests can proceed in parallel instead of serializing.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux