On Tue, 3 May 2016 09:00:41 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/03/2016 07:42 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > 2016-05-02 18:42 GMT+08:00 Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > [...]
> >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> >> index 9102ae1..d63ea60 100644
> >> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> >> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> >> @@ -2008,7 +2008,8 @@ void kvm_vcpu_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >> * arrives.
> >> */
> >> if (kvm_vcpu_check_block(vcpu) < 0) {
> >> - ++vcpu->stat.halt_successful_poll;
> >> + if (vcpu_valid_wakeup(vcpu))
> >> + ++vcpu->stat.halt_successful_poll;
> >> goto out;
> >> }
> >> cur = ktime_get();
> >> @@ -2038,14 +2039,16 @@ out:
> >> if (block_ns <= vcpu->halt_poll_ns)
> >> ;
> >> /* we had a long block, shrink polling */
> >> - else if (vcpu->halt_poll_ns && block_ns > halt_poll_ns)
> >> + else if (!vcpu_valid_wakeup(vcpu) ||
> >> + (vcpu->halt_poll_ns && block_ns > halt_poll_ns))
> >> shrink_halt_poll_ns(vcpu);
> >> /* we had a short halt and our poll time is too small */
> >> else if (vcpu->halt_poll_ns < halt_poll_ns &&
> >> - block_ns < halt_poll_ns)
> >> + block_ns < halt_poll_ns && vcpu_valid_wakeup(vcpu))
> >> grow_halt_poll_ns(vcpu);
> >> } else
> >> vcpu->halt_poll_ns = 0;
> >> + vcpu_reset_wakeup(vcpu);
> >
> > Why mark the next wakeup as a non-sucessful poll?
>
> It is basically only used for s390 and used as a mean to implement the "default off,
> only on for selected cases". But yes, if somebody else wants to use it this might
> need to be changed.
> So what about changing this into
> kvm_arch_vcpu_block_finish(vcpu)
> which is a reset on s390 and a no for others?
I like that idea.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
