[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] xen: Have schedulers revise initial placement
On Fri, 2016-07-15 at 19:07 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 15/07/16 19:02, George Dunlap wrote: > > > > diff --git a/xen/common/sched_credit2.c > > b/xen/common/sched_credit2.c > > index 3b9aa27..5a04985 100644 > > --- a/xen/common/sched_credit2.c > > +++ b/xen/common/sched_credit2.c > > @@ -1620,15 +1620,23 @@ csched2_vcpu_insert(const struct scheduler > > *ops, struct vcpu *vc) > > > > BUG_ON(is_idle_vcpu(vc)); > > > > + /* Locks in cpu_pick expect irqs to be disabled */ > > + local_irq_disable(); > This doesn't make the problem much worse, but is there a plan to fix > this issue? > There's a little bit more than a plan. I've got a proof of concept implementation which was working (now I need to refresh it), but for which I never really managed to evaluate the performance impact as accurately as I wanted to. In fact, I actually have a couple of variants implemented, that I was comparing against each others, in addition to against 'vanilla'. The problem was that I really was not seeing any impact at all, which looked strange (I was expecting improvement, at least on some workloads), and I wanted to investigate further. I'm leaving here the link to two branches, where I stashed some of the code that I have come up so far. As I said, it's WIP and needs refreshing and reworking. > None of the scheduler-accounting functions should be disabling > interrupts. > They don't. But you can't keep irq disabled for some operations and enabled for others, on the same lock (because of the irq-safety spinlock checks/enforcement). So you have to always keep IRQ enabled, for all scheduling operations, which is ok for _almost_ all of them, with the only exception of the wakeup of a vcpu. So, the idea was to treat that one case specially, i.e., put the waking vcpus in a queue, and then drain the queue somehow. The insertion in the queue needs to be done disabling interrupts, but the draining --which is where the actual scheduling related hooks and operations are done-- can be done with IRQs on, which is what we want. What I was experimenting on was trying different ways of managing such a queue, e.g., only one queue for all CPUs or per-CPU queues; or whether to always drain the queue or only pick a couple of vcpu and defer the rest again; or whether to allow concurrent draining of the queue, or only have one CPU (at a time) doing that; etc etc. The "1 queue for all" and "per-CPU queues" is what's in the following two branches: git://xenbits.xen.org/people/dariof/xen.git wip/sched/irq-enabled http://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=people/dariof/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/wip/sched/irq-enabled git://xenbits.xen.org/people/dariof/xen.git wip/sched/irq-enabled-percpu http://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=people/dariof/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/wip/sched/irq-enabled-percpu I'll get back to this soon. In the meanwhile, feel free to comment, toss ideas, criticize, whatever. :-D Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) Attachment:
signature.asc _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |