Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] kvm: Be courteous to other VMs in overcommittedscenario in PLE handler

[Takuya Yoshikawa]

On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:30:20 +0530
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> When PLE handler fails to find a better candidate to yield_to, it
> goes back and does spin again. This is acceptable when we do not
> have overcommit.
> But in overcommitted scenarios (especially when we have large
> number of small guests), it is better to yield.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c |    4 ++++
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> index 8323685..713b677 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -1660,6 +1660,10 @@ void kvm_vcpu_on_spin(struct kvm_vcpu *me)
>  			}
>  		}
>  	}
> +	/* In overcommitted cases, yield instead of spinning */
> +	if (!yielded && rq_nr_running() > 1)
> +		schedule();

How about doing cond_resched() instead?

I'm not sure whether checking more sched stuff in KVM code is a
good thing.

	Takuya
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/