[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Reuse irq number for virq/ipi after vcpu unplug/plug

  • To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:28:45 +0800
  • Delivery-date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 04:28:26 -0800
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcdHTqIuaJIC5LiAQZGiyexI3PPLIQAyY637AA7yNvA=
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Reuse irq number for virq/ipi after vcpu unplug/plug

>From: Keir Fraser [mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
>Sent: 2007年2月4日 12:52
>On 3/2/07 04:49, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Irq nunmber for per-vcpu event (virq/ipi) needs kept
>> accross vcpu plug/unplug, once allocated. We just
>> reuse this irq number and bind it to a new event port.
>> Or else, /proc/interrupt exports messed statistics
>> like:
>Noone cares about absolute /proc/interrupt numbers, only rate 
>of change. If
>pushed, I would argue that the stats should be zeroed when an 
>interrupt line
>is freed (since the interrupt then stops appearing in /proc/interrupts,
>which logically implies that the stats lifetime has ended, and 
>so a reuse of
>that interrupt is a new lifetime starting from zero). After all, all
>irq-evtchn bindings are dynamic running on Xen: a Linux irq may
>theoretically get used for all sorts of different devices during the
>lifetime of the Linux guest. Should all these uses get 
>aggregated over time?
>Zeroing the stats would potentially be a patch for lkml, or we 
>could do it
>for dynirqs ourselves in unbind_from_irq(). That's a patch I 
>would accept.
> -- Keir

Basically I agree with you, but I'm not sure about the usage model 
on such stats. Isn't it up to application to decide? App may decide
to do some action (like balance) by rate of change, so does the
aggregated value. If both usage models exist, do we need consider
both for compatibility to app's assumption?

Another point I'm not for sure is the save/restore and migration.
>From user perspective, he has no knowledge that cpu1...N are
unplugged and then plugged along the process. Thus will anyone 
feel strange about the fact that all cpus except cpu0 gets their 
per-vcpu interrupt stats empty after restored or migrated? This
seems not an explicit lifetime restart...

So I still think virq/ipi are a bit special, and it's reasonable to 
zero stats for the rest. :-)


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.