All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
To: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
	Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: cohuck@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com, pasic@linux.ibm.com,
	david@redhat.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] KVM: s390: pv: implement lazy destroy for reboot
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 16:15:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <566654e2-92fd-4e91-325e-ced6a89b7a0e@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fcfd5d04-1a08-f91e-7bc2-8878c6dcd1eb@linux.ibm.com>



Am 05.10.21 um 15:26 schrieb Janosch Frank:
> On 9/20/21 15:24, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
>> Previously, when a protected VM was rebooted or when it was shut down,
>> its memory was made unprotected, and then the protected VM itself was
>> destroyed. Looping over the whole address space can take some time,
>> considering the overhead of the various Ultravisor Calls (UVCs). This
>> means that a reboot or a shutdown would take a potentially long amount
>> of time, depending on the amount of used memory.
>>
>> This patchseries implements a deferred destroy mechanism for protected
>> guests. When a protected guest is destroyed, its memory is cleared in
>> background, allowing the guest to restart or terminate significantly
>> faster than before.
>>
>> There are 2 possibilities when a protected VM is torn down:
>> * it still has an address space associated (reboot case)
>> * it does not have an address space anymore (shutdown case)
>>
>> For the reboot case, the reference count of the mm is increased, and
>> then a background thread is started to clean up. Once the thread went
>> through the whole address space, the protected VM is actually
>> destroyed.
>>
>> This means that the same address space can have memory belonging to
>> more than one protected guest, although only one will be running, the
>> others will in fact not even have any CPUs.
>>
>> The shutdown case is more controversial, and it will be dealt with in a
>> future patchseries.
>>
>> When a guest is destroyed, its memory still counts towards its memory
>> control group until it's actually freed (I tested this experimentally)
> 
> 
> @Christian: I'd like to have #1-3 in early so we can focus on the more complicated stuff.

Yes, makes perfect sense.

      reply	other threads:[~2021-10-05 14:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-20 13:24 [PATCH v5 00/14] KVM: s390: pv: implement lazy destroy for reboot Claudio Imbrenda
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 01/14] KVM: s390: pv: add macros for UVC CC values Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-05 13:08   ` Janosch Frank
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 02/14] KVM: s390: pv: avoid double free of sida page Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-05 13:11   ` Janosch Frank
2021-10-05 13:38   ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 03/14] KVM: s390: pv: avoid stalls for kvm_s390_pv_init_vm Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-05 13:20   ` Janosch Frank
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 04/14] KVM: s390: pv: avoid stalls when making pages secure Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-06 15:54   ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-10-06 16:14     ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-12  7:43   ` Janosch Frank
2021-10-12  8:59   ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 05/14] KVM: s390: pv: leak the topmost page table when destroy fails Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-12  7:58   ` Janosch Frank
2021-10-12  8:33     ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 06/14] KVM: s390: pv: properly handle page flags for protected guests Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-12  7:59   ` Janosch Frank
2021-10-26 11:53   ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 07/14] KVM: s390: pv: handle secure storage violations " Claudio Imbrenda
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 08/14] KVM: s390: pv: handle secure storage exceptions for normal guests Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-12  8:16   ` Janosch Frank
2021-10-12  8:35     ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-12 12:31       ` Janosch Frank
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 09/14] KVM: s390: pv: refactor s390_reset_acc Claudio Imbrenda
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 10/14] KVM: s390: pv: usage counter instead of flag Claudio Imbrenda
2021-09-20 13:24 ` [PATCH v5 11/14] KVM: s390: pv: add export before import Claudio Imbrenda
2021-09-20 13:25 ` [PATCH v5 12/14] KVM: s390: pv: module parameter to fence lazy destroy Claudio Imbrenda
2021-09-20 13:25 ` [PATCH v5 13/14] KVM: s390: pv: lazy destroy for reboot Claudio Imbrenda
2021-09-20 13:25 ` [PATCH v5 14/14] KVM: s390: pv: avoid export before import if possible Claudio Imbrenda
2021-10-05 13:26 ` [PATCH v5 00/14] KVM: s390: pv: implement lazy destroy for reboot Janosch Frank
2021-10-05 14:15   ` Christian Borntraeger [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=566654e2-92fd-4e91-325e-ced6a89b7a0e@de.ibm.com \
    --to=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=thuth@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.