All the mail mirrored from lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: nested VPID emulation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 18:14:57 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BLU436-SMTP11466E2B935C6296917ADBA805C0@phx.gbl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55F6DF9D.5070508@siemens.com>

On 9/14/15 10:54 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2015-09-14 14:52, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> VPID is used to tag address space and avoid a TLB flush. Currently L0 use
>> the same VPID to run L1 and all its guests. KVM flushes VPID when switching
>> between L1 and L2.
>>
>> This patch advertises VPID to the L1 hypervisor, then address space of L1 and
>> L2 can be separately treated and avoid TLB flush when swithing between L1 and
>> L2. This patch gets ~3x performance improvement for lmbench 8p/64k ctxsw.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>   1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> index da1590e..06bc31e 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> @@ -1157,6 +1157,11 @@ static inline bool nested_cpu_has_virt_x2apic_mode(struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
>>   	return nested_cpu_has2(vmcs12, SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUALIZE_X2APIC_MODE);
>>   }
>>   
>> +static inline bool nested_cpu_has_vpid(struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
>> +{
>> +	return nested_cpu_has2(vmcs12, SECONDARY_EXEC_ENABLE_VPID);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static inline bool nested_cpu_has_apic_reg_virt(struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
>>   {
>>   	return nested_cpu_has2(vmcs12, SECONDARY_EXEC_APIC_REGISTER_VIRT);
>> @@ -2471,6 +2476,7 @@ static void nested_vmx_setup_ctls_msrs(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>>   		SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUALIZE_APIC_ACCESSES |
>>   		SECONDARY_EXEC_RDTSCP |
>>   		SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUALIZE_X2APIC_MODE |
>> +		SECONDARY_EXEC_ENABLE_VPID |
>>   		SECONDARY_EXEC_APIC_REGISTER_VIRT |
>>   		SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUAL_INTR_DELIVERY |
>>   		SECONDARY_EXEC_WBINVD_EXITING |
>> @@ -4160,7 +4166,7 @@ static void allocate_vpid(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>>   	int vpid;
>>   
>>   	vmx->vpid = 0;
>> -	if (!enable_vpid)
>> +	if (!enable_vpid || is_guest_mode(&vmx->vcpu))
>>   		return;
>>   	spin_lock(&vmx_vpid_lock);
>>   	vpid = find_first_zero_bit(vmx_vpid_bitmap, VMX_NR_VPIDS);
>> @@ -6738,6 +6744,14 @@ static int handle_vmclear(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>   	}
>>   	vmcs12 = kmap(page);
>>   	vmcs12->launch_state = 0;
>> +	if (enable_vpid) {
>> +		if (nested_cpu_has_vpid(vmcs12)) {
>> +			spin_lock(&vmx_vpid_lock);
>> +			if (vmcs12->virtual_processor_id != 0)
>> +				__clear_bit(vmcs12->virtual_processor_id, vmx_vpid_bitmap);
>> +			spin_unlock(&vmx_vpid_lock);
> Maybe enhance free_vpid (and also allocate_vpid) to work generically and
> let the caller decide where to take the vpid from or where to store it?

Good idea.

>
>> +		}
>> +	}
>>   	kunmap(page);
>>   	nested_release_page(page);
>>   
>> @@ -9189,6 +9203,7 @@ static void prepare_vmcs02(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
>>   {
>>   	struct vcpu_vmx *vmx = to_vmx(vcpu);
>>   	u32 exec_control;
>> +	int vpid;
>>   
>>   	vmcs_write16(GUEST_ES_SELECTOR, vmcs12->guest_es_selector);
>>   	vmcs_write16(GUEST_CS_SELECTOR, vmcs12->guest_cs_selector);
>> @@ -9438,13 +9453,21 @@ static void prepare_vmcs02(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
>>   	else
>>   		vmcs_write64(TSC_OFFSET, vmx->nested.vmcs01_tsc_offset);
>>   
>> +
>>   	if (enable_vpid) {
>> -		/*
>> -		 * Trivially support vpid by letting L2s share their parent
>> -		 * L1's vpid. TODO: move to a more elaborate solution, giving
>> -		 * each L2 its own vpid and exposing the vpid feature to L1.
>> -		 */
>> -		vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vmx->vpid);
>> +		if (nested_cpu_has_vpid(vmcs12)) {
>> +			if (vmcs12->virtual_processor_id == 0) {
>> +				spin_lock(&vmx_vpid_lock);
>> +				vpid = find_first_zero_bit(vmx_vpid_bitmap, VMX_NR_VPIDS);
>> +				if (vpid < VMX_NR_VPIDS)
>> +					__set_bit(vpid, vmx_vpid_bitmap);
>> +				spin_unlock(&vmx_vpid_lock);
>> +				vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vpid);
> It's a bit non-obvious that vpid == VMX_NR_VPIDS (no free vpids) will
> lead to vpid == 0 when writing VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID. You should leave at
> least a comment. Or generalize allocate_vpid as that one is already
> clearer in this regard.

Ditto.

>
>> +			} else
>> +				vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vmcs12->virtual_processor_id);
>> +		} else
>> +			vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vmx->vpid);
>> +
>>   		vmx_flush_tlb(vcpu);
>>   	}
>>   
>> @@ -9973,6 +9996,8 @@ static void prepare_vmcs12(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vmcs12 *vmcs12,
>>   		vmcs12_save_pending_event(vcpu, vmcs12);
>>   	}
>>   
>> +	if (nested_cpu_has_vpid(vmcs12))
>> +		vmcs12->virtual_processor_id = vmcs_read16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID);
>>   	/*
>>   	 * Drop what we picked up for L2 via vmx_complete_interrupts. It is
>>   	 * preserved above and would only end up incorrectly in L1.
>>
> Last but not least: the guest can now easily exhaust the host's pool of
> vpid by simply spawning plenty of VCPUs for L2, no? Is this acceptable
> or should there be some limit?

I reuse the value of vpid02 while vpid12 changed w/ one invvpid in v2, 
and the scenario which you pointed out can be avoid.

Regards,
Wanpeng Li

  reply	other threads:[~2015-09-15 10:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-14 12:52 [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: nested VPID emulation Wanpeng Li
2015-09-14 14:54 ` Jan Kiszka
2015-09-15 10:14   ` Wanpeng Li [this message]
2015-09-15 17:32     ` Jan Kiszka
2015-09-16  2:36       ` Wanpeng Li
2015-09-16  5:20         ` Jan Kiszka
2015-09-16  6:10           ` Wanpeng Li
2015-09-14 16:08 ` Bandan Das
2015-09-15 10:18   ` Wanpeng Li

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=BLU436-SMTP11466E2B935C6296917ADBA805C0@phx.gbl \
    --to=wanpeng.li@hotmail.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.