diff options
author | Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> | 2013-10-08 18:38:13 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> | 2013-10-17 15:26:50 -0700 |
commit | 58d5ec8f8ee318b26b29207874fbaee626973952 (patch) | |
tree | bf3fdfd27af3c947c51fa4335009a45433a629f2 /crypto/md4.c | |
parent | d570142674890fe10b3d7d86aa105e3dfce1ddfa (diff) | |
download | op-kernel-dev-58d5ec8f8ee318b26b29207874fbaee626973952.zip op-kernel-dev-58d5ec8f8ee318b26b29207874fbaee626973952.tar.gz |
ARM: KVM: Yield CPU when vcpu executes a WFE
On an (even slightly) oversubscribed system, spinlocks are quickly
becoming a bottleneck, as some vcpus are spinning, waiting for a
lock to be released, while the vcpu holding the lock may not be
running at all.
This creates contention, and the observed slowdown is 40x for
hackbench. No, this isn't a typo.
The solution is to trap blocking WFEs and tell KVM that we're
now spinning. This ensures that other vpus will get a scheduling
boost, allowing the lock to be released more quickly. Also, using
CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_CPU_RELAX_INTERCEPT slightly improves the performance
when the VM is severely overcommited.
Quick test to estimate the performance: hackbench 1 process 1000
2xA15 host (baseline): 1.843s
2xA15 guest w/o patch: 2.083s
4xA15 guest w/o patch: 80.212s
8xA15 guest w/o patch: Could not be bothered to find out
2xA15 guest w/ patch: 2.102s
4xA15 guest w/ patch: 3.205s
8xA15 guest w/ patch: 6.887s
So we go from a 40x degradation to 1.5x in the 2x overcommit case,
which is vaguely more acceptable.
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'crypto/md4.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions