lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 08/24] sched: Introduce per memory space current virtual cpu id
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> On 2022-11-14 15:49, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2022, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > On 2022-11-10 23:41, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 1:05 PM Mathieu Desnoyers
> > > > <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> > > > Also, in my mind "virtual cpu" is vCPU, which this isn't. Maybe
> > > > "compacted cpu" or something? It's a strange sort of concept.
> > >
> > > I've kept the same wording that has been introduced in 2011 by Paul Turner
> > > and used internally at Google since then, although it may be confusing if
> > > people expect kvm-vCPU and rseq-vcpu to mean the same thing. Both really end
> > > up providing the semantic of a virtually assigned cpu id (in opposition to
> > > the logical cpu id on the system), but this is much more involved in the
> > > case of KVM.
> >
> > I had the same reaction as Andy. The rseq concepts don't worry me so much as the
> > existence of "vcpu" in mm_struct/task_struct, e.g. switch_mm_vcpu() when switching
> > between KVM vCPU tasks is going to be super confusing. Ditto for mm_vcpu_get()
> > and mm_vcpu_put() in the few cases where KVM currently does mmget()/mmput().
>
> I'm fine with changing the wording if it helps make things less confusing.
>
> Should we go for "compact-cpu-id" ? "packed-cpu-id" ? Other ideas ?

What about something like "process-local-cpu-id" to capture that the ID has meaning
only within the associated address space / process?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-17 20:11    [W:0.128 / U:0.340 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site