On 2019/6/28 6:28, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 08:02:58PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
With the boot parameter "hv_nopvspin" specified a Hyperv guest should
not make use of paravirt spinlocks, but behave as if running on bare
metal. This is not true, however, as the qspinlock code will fall back
to a test-and-set scheme when it is detecting a hypervisor.
In order to avoid this disable the virt_spin_lock_key.
Same change for XEN is already in Commit e6fd28eb3522
("locking/spinlocks, paravirt, xen: Correct the xen_nopvspin case")
Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-hyperv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
arch/x86/hyperv/hv_spinlock.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/x86/hyperv/hv_spinlock.c
b/arch/x86/hyperv/hv_spinlock.c
index 07f21a0..d90b4b0 100644
--- a/arch/x86/hyperv/hv_spinlock.c
+++ b/arch/x86/hyperv/hv_spinlock.c
@@ -64,6 +64,9 @@ __visible bool hv_vcpu_is_preempted(int vcpu)
void __init hv_init_spinlocks(void)
{
+ if (unlikely(!hv_pvspin))
+ static_branch_disable(&virt_spin_lock_key);
This should be combined in the conditional under it, which already
attempts to disable PV spinlocks, note how hv_pvspin is checked there.
hc_pvspin isn't the only reason we would disable PV spinlocks on hyperv.
In virt_spin_lock() there is a comment as below. The test-and-set spinlock
is an optimization to hypervisor platform when PV spinlock is unsupported.
/*
* On hypervisors without PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS support we fall
* back to a Test-and-Set spinlock, because fair locks have
* horrible lock 'holder' preemption issues.
*/
So my understanding is:
If hv_pvspin=0 by command line, we want to behave as if running on bare
metal(the fair locks path).
Though there is performance regression, but it's not that important when
we use hv_pvspin=0.
If PV spinlock is disabled by other reasons, we prefer the optimization
path.
Also, there's no need for the unlikely() here, it's only getting called
once...
Ok, I'll removed it.
Thanks
Zhenzhong
