All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
To: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	ajones@ventanamicro.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, maz@kernel.org,
	shuah@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, seanjc@google.com,
	peterx@redhat.com, ricarkol@google.com, zhenyzha@redhat.com,
	shan.gavin@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Probe memory slots for once
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 06:18:39 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b720dbad-4b8b-a617-f782-7f95bcdb3d54@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fb3926da-a683-2811-71a4-31fe36a9cb50@maciej.szmigiero.name>

On 10/18/22 1:34 AM, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> On 14.10.2022 09:19, Gavin Shan wrote:
>> prepare_vm() is called in every iteration and run. The allowed memory
>> slots (KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS) are probed for multiple times. It's not
>> free and unnecessary.
>>
>> Move the probing logic for the allowed memory slots to parse_args()
>> for once, which is upper layer of prepare_vm().
>>
>> No functional change intended.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 29 ++++++++++---------
>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
>> index dcb492b3f27b..d5aa9148f96f 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
>> @@ -245,27 +245,17 @@ static bool prepare_vm(struct vm_data *data, int nslots, uint64_t *maxslots,
>>                  void *guest_code, uint64_t mempages,
>>                  struct timespec *slot_runtime)
>>   {
>> -    uint32_t max_mem_slots;
>>       uint64_t rempages;
>>       uint64_t guest_addr;
>>       uint32_t slot;
>>       struct timespec tstart;
>>       struct sync_area *sync;
>> -    max_mem_slots = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS);
>> -    TEST_ASSERT(max_mem_slots > 1,
>> -            "KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS should be greater than 1");
>> -    TEST_ASSERT(nslots > 1 || nslots == -1,
>> -            "Slot count cap should be greater than 1");
>> -    if (nslots != -1)
>> -        max_mem_slots = min(max_mem_slots, (uint32_t)nslots);
>> -    pr_info_v("Allowed number of memory slots: %"PRIu32"\n", max_mem_slots);
>> -
>>       TEST_ASSERT(mempages > 1,
>>               "Can't test without any memory");
>>       data->npages = mempages;
>> -    data->nslots = max_mem_slots - 1;
>> +    data->nslots = nslots;
>>       data->pages_per_slot = mempages / data->nslots;
>>       if (!data->pages_per_slot) {
>>           *maxslots = mempages + 1;
>> @@ -885,8 +875,8 @@ static bool parse_args(int argc, char *argv[],
>>               break;
>>           case 's':
>>               targs->nslots = atoi(optarg);
>> -            if (targs->nslots <= 0 && targs->nslots != -1) {
>> -                pr_info("Slot count cap has to be positive or -1 for no cap\n");
>> +            if (targs->nslots <= 1 && targs->nslots != -1) {
>> +                pr_info("Slot count cap must be larger than 1 or -1 for no cap\n");
>>                   return false;
>>               }
>>               break;
>> @@ -932,6 +922,19 @@ static bool parse_args(int argc, char *argv[],
>>           return false;
>>       }
>> +    /* Memory slot 0 is reserved */
>> +    if (targs->nslots == -1) {
>> +        targs->nslots = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS) - 1;
>> +        if (targs->nslots < 1) {
>> +            pr_info("KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS should be greater than 1\n");
>> +            return false;
>> +        }
>> +    } else {
>> +        targs->nslots--;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    pr_info_v("Number of memory slots: %d\n", targs->nslots);
>> +
> 
> Can't see any capping of the command line provided slot count to
> KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS value, like the old code did.
> 

Indeed. I wanted to avoid extra variable @max_mem_slots and the
capping is missed. I will fix it up in next revision.

>>       return true;
>>   }

Thanks,
Gavin


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
To: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, maz@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhenyzha@redhat.com,
	shan.gavin@gmail.com, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
	pbonzini@redhat.com, shuah@kernel.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, ajones@ventanamicro.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Probe memory slots for once
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 06:18:39 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b720dbad-4b8b-a617-f782-7f95bcdb3d54@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fb3926da-a683-2811-71a4-31fe36a9cb50@maciej.szmigiero.name>

On 10/18/22 1:34 AM, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> On 14.10.2022 09:19, Gavin Shan wrote:
>> prepare_vm() is called in every iteration and run. The allowed memory
>> slots (KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS) are probed for multiple times. It's not
>> free and unnecessary.
>>
>> Move the probing logic for the allowed memory slots to parse_args()
>> for once, which is upper layer of prepare_vm().
>>
>> No functional change intended.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 29 ++++++++++---------
>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
>> index dcb492b3f27b..d5aa9148f96f 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
>> @@ -245,27 +245,17 @@ static bool prepare_vm(struct vm_data *data, int nslots, uint64_t *maxslots,
>>                  void *guest_code, uint64_t mempages,
>>                  struct timespec *slot_runtime)
>>   {
>> -    uint32_t max_mem_slots;
>>       uint64_t rempages;
>>       uint64_t guest_addr;
>>       uint32_t slot;
>>       struct timespec tstart;
>>       struct sync_area *sync;
>> -    max_mem_slots = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS);
>> -    TEST_ASSERT(max_mem_slots > 1,
>> -            "KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS should be greater than 1");
>> -    TEST_ASSERT(nslots > 1 || nslots == -1,
>> -            "Slot count cap should be greater than 1");
>> -    if (nslots != -1)
>> -        max_mem_slots = min(max_mem_slots, (uint32_t)nslots);
>> -    pr_info_v("Allowed number of memory slots: %"PRIu32"\n", max_mem_slots);
>> -
>>       TEST_ASSERT(mempages > 1,
>>               "Can't test without any memory");
>>       data->npages = mempages;
>> -    data->nslots = max_mem_slots - 1;
>> +    data->nslots = nslots;
>>       data->pages_per_slot = mempages / data->nslots;
>>       if (!data->pages_per_slot) {
>>           *maxslots = mempages + 1;
>> @@ -885,8 +875,8 @@ static bool parse_args(int argc, char *argv[],
>>               break;
>>           case 's':
>>               targs->nslots = atoi(optarg);
>> -            if (targs->nslots <= 0 && targs->nslots != -1) {
>> -                pr_info("Slot count cap has to be positive or -1 for no cap\n");
>> +            if (targs->nslots <= 1 && targs->nslots != -1) {
>> +                pr_info("Slot count cap must be larger than 1 or -1 for no cap\n");
>>                   return false;
>>               }
>>               break;
>> @@ -932,6 +922,19 @@ static bool parse_args(int argc, char *argv[],
>>           return false;
>>       }
>> +    /* Memory slot 0 is reserved */
>> +    if (targs->nslots == -1) {
>> +        targs->nslots = kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS) - 1;
>> +        if (targs->nslots < 1) {
>> +            pr_info("KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS should be greater than 1\n");
>> +            return false;
>> +        }
>> +    } else {
>> +        targs->nslots--;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    pr_info_v("Number of memory slots: %d\n", targs->nslots);
>> +
> 
> Can't see any capping of the command line provided slot count to
> KVM_CAP_NR_MEMSLOTS value, like the old code did.
> 

Indeed. I wanted to avoid extra variable @max_mem_slots and the
capping is missed. I will fix it up in next revision.

>>       return true;
>>   }

Thanks,
Gavin

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

  reply	other threads:[~2022-10-17 22:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-14  7:19 [PATCH 0/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: aarch64 cleanup/fixes Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19 ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19 ` [PATCH 1/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Use data->nslots in prepare_vm() Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19   ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19 ` [PATCH 2/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Consolidate loop conditions " Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19   ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19 ` [PATCH 3/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Probe memory slots for once Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19   ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-17 17:34   ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-17 17:34     ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-17 22:18     ` Gavin Shan [this message]
2022-10-17 22:18       ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19 ` [PATCH 4/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Support variable guest page size Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19   ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-17 21:31   ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-17 21:31     ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-18  0:46     ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-18  0:46       ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-18  0:51       ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-18  0:51         ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-18 15:56         ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-18 15:56           ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-19  0:26           ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-19  0:26             ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-19 20:18             ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-19 20:18               ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-20  7:19               ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-20  7:19                 ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19 ` [PATCH 5/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Consolidate memory sizes Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19   ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-17 21:36   ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-17 21:36     ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-17 22:08     ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-17 22:08       ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-17 22:51       ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-17 22:51         ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-17 22:56         ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-17 22:56           ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2022-10-17 23:10           ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-17 23:10             ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-17 23:32             ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-17 23:32               ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-17 23:39               ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-17 23:39                 ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-18  7:47       ` Oliver Upton
2022-10-18  7:47         ` Oliver Upton
2022-10-18  8:48         ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-18  8:48           ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-18  1:13     ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-18  1:13       ` Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19 ` [PATCH 6/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Report optimal memory slots Gavin Shan
2022-10-14  7:19   ` Gavin Shan

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=b720dbad-4b8b-a617-f782-7f95bcdb3d54@redhat.com \
    --to=gshan@redhat.com \
    --cc=ajones@ventanamicro.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mail@maciej.szmigiero.name \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=ricarkol@google.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=shan.gavin@gmail.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=zhenyzha@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.