Re: [PATCH 5/8] KVM: use jump label to optimize checking for HW enabled APIC in APIC_BASE MSR.

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

 



On 08/05/2012 05:42 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 05:35:21PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 08/05/2012 03:58 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> > Usually all APICs are HW enabled so the check can be optimized out.
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> >  arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c |   29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> >  arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h |    1 +
>> >  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c   |    1 +
>> >  3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> > 
>> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> > index c3f14fe..1aa5528 100644
>> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
>> >  #include <asm/current.h>
>> >  #include <asm/apicdef.h>
>> >  #include <linux/atomic.h>
>> > +#include <linux/jump_label.h>
>> >  #include "kvm_cache_regs.h"
>> >  #include "irq.h"
>> >  #include "trace.h"
>> > @@ -117,9 +118,13 @@ static inline int __apic_test_and_clear_vector(int vec, void *bitmap)
>> >  	return __test_and_clear_bit(VEC_POS(vec), (bitmap) + REG_POS(vec));
>> >  }
>> >  
>> > +struct static_key_deferred apic_hw_disabled __read_mostly;
>> 
>> On top of file please.  Add all_ to the name to make it clear we're
>> talking about all apics.
>> 
> This is count of disabled apics really. So I think all_apic_hw_disabled
> is misleading.
> 
>> > +
>> >  static inline int apic_hw_enabled(struct kvm_lapic *apic)
>> >  {
>> > -	return (apic)->vcpu->arch.apic_base & MSR_IA32_APICBASE_ENABLE;
>> > +	if (static_key_false(&apic_hw_disabled.key))
>> > +		return apic->vcpu->arch.apic_base & MSR_IA32_APICBASE_ENABLE;
>> 
>> Hm, for the test to be readable, it needs to be
>> 
>>    if (static_key_false(&all_apics_hw_enabled))
>> 
> Exactly. all_ makes it so because apic_hw_disabled is a counter that
> counts disabled apics. So may be call it global_hw_disabled_apic_counter?
> 

The problem is how static_key_false() is defined.  It returns true if
the count > 0, opposite from what I'd expect.  So anything with counter
semantics will be confusing.  I guess we need to pick a neutral name
(apic_disabled_key or apic_disabled_slowpath or such) to force the
reader to look at the definitions.

-- 
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