From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: "James Hogan" <jhogan@kernel.org>,
"Paul Mackerras" <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
"Janosch Frank" <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
"Wanpeng Li" <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, "David Hildenbrand" <david@redhat.com>,
"Joerg Roedel" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"Cornelia Huck" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, "Vitaly Kuznetsov" <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, "Jim Mattson" <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/15] KVM: Dynamically size memslot arrays
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:39:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191023093954.GH2652@e113682-lin.lund.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191022003537.13013-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 05:35:22PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> The end goal of this series is to dynamically size the memslot array so
> that KVM allocates memory based on the number of memslots in use, as
> opposed to unconditionally allocating memory for the maximum number of
> memslots. On x86, each memslot consumes 88 bytes, and so with 2 address
> spaces of 512 memslots, each VM consumes ~90k bytes for the memslots.
> E.g. given a VM that uses a total of 30 memslots, dynamic sizing reduces
> the memory footprint from 90k to ~2.6k bytes.
>
> The changes required to support dynamic sizing are relatively small,
> e.g. are essentially contained in patches 12/13 and 13/13. Patches 1-11
> clean up the memslot code, which has gotten quite crusy, especially
> __kvm_set_memory_region(). The clean up is likely not strictly necessary
> to switch to dynamic sizing, but I didn't have a remotely reasonable
> level of confidence in the correctness of the dynamic sizing without first
> doing the clean up.
>
> Testing, especially non-x86 platforms, would be greatly appreciated. The
> non-x86 changes are for all intents and purposes untested, e.g. I compile
> tested pieces of the code by copying them into x86, but that's it. In
> theory, the vast majority of the functional changes are arch agnostic, in
> theory...
I've built this for arm/arm64, and I've ran my usual set of tests which
pass fine. I've also run the selftest framework's tests for the dirty
logging and the migration loop test for arm64, and they pass fine.
You can add my (for arm64):
Tested-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/15] KVM: Dynamically size memslot arrays
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:39:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191023093954.GH2652@e113682-lin.lund.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191022003537.13013-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 05:35:22PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> The end goal of this series is to dynamically size the memslot array so
> that KVM allocates memory based on the number of memslots in use, as
> opposed to unconditionally allocating memory for the maximum number of
> memslots. On x86, each memslot consumes 88 bytes, and so with 2 address
> spaces of 512 memslots, each VM consumes ~90k bytes for the memslots.
> E.g. given a VM that uses a total of 30 memslots, dynamic sizing reduces
> the memory footprint from 90k to ~2.6k bytes.
>
> The changes required to support dynamic sizing are relatively small,
> e.g. are essentially contained in patches 12/13 and 13/13. Patches 1-11
> clean up the memslot code, which has gotten quite crusy, especially
> __kvm_set_memory_region(). The clean up is likely not strictly necessary
> to switch to dynamic sizing, but I didn't have a remotely reasonable
> level of confidence in the correctness of the dynamic sizing without first
> doing the clean up.
>
> Testing, especially non-x86 platforms, would be greatly appreciated. The
> non-x86 changes are for all intents and purposes untested, e.g. I compile
> tested pieces of the code by copying them into x86, but that's it. In
> theory, the vast majority of the functional changes are arch agnostic, in
> theory...
I've built this for arm/arm64, and I've ran my usual set of tests which
pass fine. I've also run the selftest framework's tests for the dirty
logging and the migration loop test for arm64, and they pass fine.
You can add my (for arm64):
Tested-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: "Cornelia Huck" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
"Wanpeng Li" <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
"Janosch Frank" <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"James Hogan" <jhogan@kernel.org>,
"Joerg Roedel" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"David Hildenbrand" <david@redhat.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Paul Mackerras" <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
"Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Vitaly Kuznetsov" <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
"Jim Mattson" <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/15] KVM: Dynamically size memslot arrays
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:39:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191023093954.GH2652@e113682-lin.lund.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191022003537.13013-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 05:35:22PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> The end goal of this series is to dynamically size the memslot array so
> that KVM allocates memory based on the number of memslots in use, as
> opposed to unconditionally allocating memory for the maximum number of
> memslots. On x86, each memslot consumes 88 bytes, and so with 2 address
> spaces of 512 memslots, each VM consumes ~90k bytes for the memslots.
> E.g. given a VM that uses a total of 30 memslots, dynamic sizing reduces
> the memory footprint from 90k to ~2.6k bytes.
>
> The changes required to support dynamic sizing are relatively small,
> e.g. are essentially contained in patches 12/13 and 13/13. Patches 1-11
> clean up the memslot code, which has gotten quite crusy, especially
> __kvm_set_memory_region(). The clean up is likely not strictly necessary
> to switch to dynamic sizing, but I didn't have a remotely reasonable
> level of confidence in the correctness of the dynamic sizing without first
> doing the clean up.
>
> Testing, especially non-x86 platforms, would be greatly appreciated. The
> non-x86 changes are for all intents and purposes untested, e.g. I compile
> tested pieces of the code by copying them into x86, but that's it. In
> theory, the vast majority of the functional changes are arch agnostic, in
> theory...
I've built this for arm/arm64, and I've ran my usual set of tests which
pass fine. I've also run the selftest framework's tests for the dirty
logging and the migration loop test for arm64, and they pass fine.
You can add my (for arm64):
Tested-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: "James Hogan" <jhogan@kernel.org>,
"Paul Mackerras" <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
"Janosch Frank" <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
"Wanpeng Li" <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, "David Hildenbrand" <david@redhat.com>,
"Joerg Roedel" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"Cornelia Huck" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, "Vitaly Kuznetsov" <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, "Jim Mattson" <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/15] KVM: Dynamically size memslot arrays
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:39:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191023093954.GH2652@e113682-lin.lund.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191022003537.13013-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 05:35:22PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> The end goal of this series is to dynamically size the memslot array so
> that KVM allocates memory based on the number of memslots in use, as
> opposed to unconditionally allocating memory for the maximum number of
> memslots. On x86, each memslot consumes 88 bytes, and so with 2 address
> spaces of 512 memslots, each VM consumes ~90k bytes for the memslots.
> E.g. given a VM that uses a total of 30 memslots, dynamic sizing reduces
> the memory footprint from 90k to ~2.6k bytes.
>
> The changes required to support dynamic sizing are relatively small,
> e.g. are essentially contained in patches 12/13 and 13/13. Patches 1-11
> clean up the memslot code, which has gotten quite crusy, especially
> __kvm_set_memory_region(). The clean up is likely not strictly necessary
> to switch to dynamic sizing, but I didn't have a remotely reasonable
> level of confidence in the correctness of the dynamic sizing without first
> doing the clean up.
>
> Testing, especially non-x86 platforms, would be greatly appreciated. The
> non-x86 changes are for all intents and purposes untested, e.g. I compile
> tested pieces of the code by copying them into x86, but that's it. In
> theory, the vast majority of the functional changes are arch agnostic, in
> theory...
I've built this for arm/arm64, and I've ran my usual set of tests which
pass fine. I've also run the selftest framework's tests for the dirty
logging and the migration loop test for arm64, and they pass fine.
You can add my (for arm64):
Tested-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-23 9:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 150+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-22 0:35 [PATCH v2 00/15] KVM: Dynamically size memslot arrays Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 01/15] KVM: Reinstall old memslots if arch preparation fails Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 02/15] KVM: Don't free new memslot if allocation of said memslot fails Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 03/15] KVM: PPC: Move memslot memory allocation into prepare_memory_region() Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 11:55 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-24 11:55 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-24 11:55 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-24 11:55 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-24 11:55 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 04/15] KVM: x86: Allocate memslot resources during prepare_memory_region() Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 05/15] KVM: Drop kvm_arch_create_memslot() Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 06/15] KVM: Explicitly free allocated-but-unused dirty bitmap Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 07/15] KVM: Refactor error handling for setting memory region Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 08/15] KVM: Move setting of memslot into helper routine Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 09/15] KVM: Move memslot deletion to helper function Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 10/15] KVM: Simplify kvm_free_memslot() and all its descendents Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 11/15] KVM: Clean up local variable usage in __kvm_set_memory_region() Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 12/15] KVM: Provide common implementation for generic dirty log functions Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-24 10:28 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-24 10:28 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-24 10:28 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-24 10:28 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-24 10:28 ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 13/15] KVM: Ensure validity of memslot with respect to kvm_get_dirty_log() Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 14/15] KVM: Terminate memslot walks via used_slots Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:28 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:28 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:28 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:28 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:52 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:52 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:52 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:52 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-24 19:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 19:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 19:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 19:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 19:42 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 19:42 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 19:42 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 19:42 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 20:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-24 20:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-24 20:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-24 20:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-24 20:48 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 20:48 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 20:48 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-24 20:48 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` [PATCH v2 15/15] KVM: Dynamically size memslot array based on number of used slots Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 15:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 15:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-22 13:59 ` [PATCH v2 00/15] KVM: Dynamically size memslot arrays Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 13:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 13:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 13:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-23 18:56 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-10-23 18:56 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-10-23 18:56 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-10-23 18:56 ` Christian Borntraeger
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 14:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-23 9:39 ` Christoffer Dall [this message]
2019-10-23 9:39 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:39 ` Christoffer Dall
2019-10-23 9:39 ` Christoffer Dall
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=20191023093954.GH2652@e113682-lin.lund.arm.com \
--to=christoffer.dall@arm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jhogan@kernel.org \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.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.