OpenVZ Forum: Devel » [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on

Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu()

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() [message #11707 is a reply to message #11705]

Tue, 03 April 2007 14:50

Alexey Dobriyan
Messages: 195
Registered: August 2006

Senior Member

On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 03:42:50PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Both powernow-k8 and cpuid attempt to schedule
> > > to the target CPU so they should already run there. But it is some other CPU,
> > > but when they ask your _on_cpu() functions they suddenly get a "real" CPU?
> > > Where is the difference between these levels of virtualness?
> >
> > *_on_cpu functions do some work on given physical CPU.
> > set_cpus_allowed() in openvz operates on VCPU level, so process doing
> > set_cpus_allowed() still could be scheduled anywhere.
>
> Ok so you have multple levels.
>
> > > Also it has weird semantics. For example if you have multiple
> > > virtual CPUs mapping to a single CPU then would the powernow-k8 driver
> > > try to set the frequency multiple times on the same physical CPU?
> >
> > If core cpufreq locking is OK, why would it?
>
> It won't know about multiple CPUs mapping to a single CPU.
>
> > apply_microcode() looks small enough to convert it to IPIs, but so far
> > nobody asked for microcode updates in openvz.
>
> Well if they try it they will probably have problems.
>
> > > Before adding any hacks like this I think your vcpu concept
> > > needs to be discussed properly on l-k. For me it doesn't look like it is
> > > something good right now though.
> >
> > Andi, I think it all relies on correctness of core cpufreq locking.
>
> I have my doubts it will cope with you changing all reasonable expected semantics
> under it.

Synchronization promitives work as expected. Otherwise openvz'd be buried in bugs
all over the map.

Core cpufreq has per-cpu array of rw-semaphores but the index of
semaphore one want to down comes from userspace not from number of CPU
process is executing virtual or physical.

Probably davej could say something.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		[PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() By: Alexey Dobriyan on Mon, 02 April 2007 11:32
		Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() By: Andi Kleen on Mon, 02 April 2007 12:10
		Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() By: hpa on Mon, 02 April 2007 16:20
		Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() By: Andi Kleen on Mon, 02 April 2007 16:55
		Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() By: Alexey Dobriyan on Tue, 03 April 2007 13:33
		Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() By: Andi Kleen on Tue, 03 April 2007 13:42
		Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() By: Alexey Dobriyan on Tue, 03 April 2007 14:50
		Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce cpuid_on_cpu() and cpuid_eax_on_cpu() By: claudiuc on Mon, 02 April 2007 11:33

Previous Topic:	[PATCH 3/3] cpuid: switch to cpuid_on_cpu()
Next Topic:	Grr sysfs networking changes...

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Mon Feb 16 11:25:45 GMT 2026

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.54409 seconds