On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 01:50:50 +0530
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> In ple handler code, last_boosted_vcpu (lbv) variable is
> serving as reference point to start when we enter.
> Also statistical analysis (below) is showing lbv is not very well
> distributed with current approach.
You are the second person to spot this bug today (yes, today).
Due to time zones, the first person has not had a chance yet to
test the patch below, which might fix the issue...
Please let me know how it goes.
====8<====
If last_boosted_vcpu == 0, then we fall through all test cases and
may end up with all VCPUs pouncing on vcpu 0. With a large enough
guest, this can result in enormous runqueue lock contention, which
can prevent vcpu0 from running, leading to a livelock.
Changing < to <= makes sure we properly handle that case.
Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 7e14068..1da542b 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -1586,7 +1586,7 @@ void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
*/
for (pass = 0; pass < 2 && !yielded; pass++) {
kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
- if (!pass && i < last_boosted_vcpu) {
+ if (!pass && i <= last_boosted_vcpu) {
i = last_boosted_vcpu;
continue;
} else if (pass && i > last_boosted_vcpu)
--
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
