This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 6947: regressions - trouble: broken/

To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 6947: regressions - trouble: broken/fail/pass
From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 13:19:45 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 02 May 2011 05:20:43 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id :thread-topic:thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=lP51XX9HA9ENCCTf/VwqQ+ZljcAItkcSbAUzRL3+MsE=; b=t/ULtuU5qwKC/VXLhjxtLnutxEjpgSDYavOf/s23eAHZJCa3obiQcAiiZ4HvxYZ2sx jQhTiN4ztjjYSuyRXfHiBKIC1ICuh7wQZiJxIJ9Hkr0G3xq3O1sHqnW+/rQpEtQzgUsy JsC4BkkkEDmPfqQ1xSBZLGk2b4V70T/69Hp6U=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=n17MTM0OnXEGNdHhYtRYUVgs9ZFXCGhrHykUDzgyMqC02aYRHwtHYOAOARZXDERSl+ RbatZinCJRR7yHVIosb7ep3xD9+gZSuZkJh4/RP69wLRM4mm2eqrjYg1EnuQGuv0XMuo 24q0f6lDWp86zSdrkYm2Suang0GjjgYdDuPEI=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4DBEB8FA020000780003F276@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcwIwzi2pwZqzLk7SkGfAj3+4Ixx3Q==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 6947: regressions - trouble: broken/fail/pass
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
On 02/05/2011 13:00, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> (3) Restructure the interrupt code to do less work in IRQ context. For
>> example tasklet-per-irq, and schedule on the local cpu. Protect a bunch of
>> the PIRQ structures with a non-IRQ lock. Would increase interrupt latency if
>> the local CPU is interrupted in hypervisor context. I'm not sure about this
>> one -- I'm not that happy about the amount of work now done in hardirq
>> context, but I'm not sure on the performance impact of deferring the work.
> I'm not inclined to make changes in this area for the purpose at hand
> either (again, Linux gets away without this - would have to check how
> e.g. KVM gets the TLB flushing done, or whether they don't defer
> flushes like we do).

Oh, another way would be to make lookup_slot invocations from IRQ context be
RCU-safe. Then the radix tree updates would not have to synchronise on the
irq_desc lock? And I believe Linux has examples of RCU-safe usage of radix
trees -- certainly Linux's radix-tree.h mentions RCU.

I must say this would be far more attractive to me than hacking the xmalloc
subsystem. That's pretty nasty.

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>