On Fri, 2 Aug 2019, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 01/08/19 23:47, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Right you are about cond_resched() being called, but for SRCU this does not
> > matter unless there is some way to do a synchronize operation on that SRCU
> > entity. It might have some other performance side effect though.
>
> I would use srcu_read_unlock/lock around the call.
>
> However, I'm wondering if the API can be improved because basically we
> have six functions for three checks of TIF flags. Does it make sense to
> have something like task_has_request_flags and task_do_requests (names
> are horrible I know) that can be used like
>
> if (task_has_request_flags()) {
> int err;
> ...srcu_read_unlock...
> // return -EINTR if signal_pending
> err = task_do_requests();
> if (err < 0)
> goto exit_no_srcu_read_unlock;
> ...srcu_read_lock...
> }
>
> taking care of all three cases with a single hook? This is important
> especially because all these checks are done by all KVM architectures in
> slightly different ways, and a unified API would be a good reason to
> make all architectures look the same.
>
> (Of course I could also define this unified API in virt/kvm/kvm_main.c,
> so this is not blocking the series in any way!).
You're not holding up something. Having a common function for this is
definitely the right approach.
As this is virt specific because it only checks for non arch specific bits
(TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME should be available for all KVM archs) and the TIF bits
are a subset of the available TIF bits because all others do not make any
sense there, this really should be a common function for KVM so that all
other archs which obviously lack a TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME check, can be fixed up
and consolidated. If we add another TIF check later then we only have to do
it in one place.
Thanks,
tglx
