All the mail mirrored from lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
To: Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: nested VPID emulation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 18:18:32 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BLU436-SMTP5E49A9FB8B5A20AC13EF6805C0@phx.gbl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <jpgfv2ht258.fsf@linux.bootlegged.copy>

On 9/15/15 12:08 AM, Bandan Das wrote:
> Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> 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.
> TLB flush does context invalidation and while that should result in
> some improvement, I never expected a 3x improvement for any workload!
> Interesting :)

The result still looks good when test v2.

>
>> 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);
>> +		}
>> +	}
>>   	kunmap(page);
>>   	nested_release_page(page);
> I don't think this is enough, we should also check for set "nested" bits
> in free_vpid() and clear them. There should be some sort of a mapping between the
> nested guest vpid and the actual vpid so that we can just clear those bits.

Agreed.

>
>> @@ -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);
>>   
>> +
> Empty space here.
>
>>   	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) {
> Ok, so if we advertise vpid to the nested hypervisor, isn't it going to
> attempt writing this field when setting up ? Atleast
> that's what Linux does, no ?

Agreed, I do the allocation of vpid02 during initialization in v2.

>
>> +				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);
>> +			} else
>> +				vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vmcs12->virtual_processor_id);
>> +		} else
>> +			vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vmx->vpid);
>> +
> I guess L1 shouldn't know what vpid L0 chose to run L2. If L1 vmreads,
> it should get what it expects for the value of vpid, not the one L0 chose.

Agreed.

>
>>   		vmx_flush_tlb(vcpu);
>>   	}
> So, this isn't removed ? I thought it's not needed anymore ?

Please review v2. :-)

Regards,
Wanpeng Li


      reply	other threads:[~2015-09-15 10:18 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
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 [this message]

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-SMTP5E49A9FB8B5A20AC13EF6805C0@phx.gbl \
    --to=wanpeng.li@hotmail.com \
    --cc=bsd@redhat.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.