From: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Avoid memslot lookup in rmap_add
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:15:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALzav=do97h9LtbWJfDaj0xRv5Ccq5m-bPq0u0=_h8ut=M6Eow@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e6070335-3f7e-aebd-93cd-3fb42a426425@redhat.com>
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 5:03 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 13/08/21 22:35, David Matlack wrote:
> > Avoid the memslot lookup in rmap_add by passing it down from the fault
> > handling code to mmu_set_spte and then to rmap_add.
> >
> > No functional change intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
>
> I think before doing this we should take another look at the aguments
> for make_spte, set_spte and mmu_set_spte. St
>
> static int mmu_set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_memory_slot *slot,
> u64 *sptep, unsigned int pte_access, bool write_fault,
> int level, gfn_t gfn, kvm_pfn_t pfn, bool speculative,
> bool host_writable)
>
> static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_memory_slot *slot,
> u64 *sptep, unsigned int pte_access, int level,
> gfn_t gfn, kvm_pfn_t pfn, bool speculative,
> bool can_unsync, bool host_writable)
>
> int make_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int pte_access, int level,
> gfn_t gfn, kvm_pfn_t pfn, u64 old_spte, bool speculative,
> bool can_unsync, bool host_writable, bool ad_disabled,
> u64 *new_spte)
>
> In particular:
>
> - set_spte should be inlined in its two callers. The SET_SPTE_*
> flags are overkill if both functions can just call make_spte+mmu_spte_update:
> mmu_set_spte can check *sptep == spte and return RET_PF_SPURIOUS directly,
> while SET_SPTE_NEED_REMOTE_TLB_FLUSH can become just a bool that is
> returned by make_spte.
>
> - level and ad_disabled can be replaced by a single pointer to struct
> kvm_mmu_page (tdp_mmu does not set ad_disabled in page_role_for_level,
> but that's not an issue).
>
> - in mmu_set_spte, write_fault, speculative and host_writable are either
> false/true/true (prefetching) or fault->write, fault->prefault,
> fault->map_writable (pagefault). So they can be replaced by a single
> struct kvm_page_fault pointer, where NULL means false/true/true. Then
> if set_spte is inlined, the ugly bool arguments only remain in make_spte
> (minus ad_disabled).
>
> This does not remove the need for a separate slot parameter,
> but at least the balance is that there are no extra arguments to
> make_spte (two go, level and ad_disabled; two come, sp and slot).
>
> I've started hacking on the above, but didn't quite finish. I'll
> keep patches 4-6 in my queue, but they'll have to wait for 5.15.
Ack. 5.15 sounds good. Let me know if you want any helping with testing.
>
> Paolo
>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 29 ++++++++---------------------
> > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h | 12 +++++++++---
> > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > index c148d481e9b5..41e2ef8ad09b 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > @@ -1630,16 +1630,15 @@ static bool kvm_test_age_rmapp(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_rmap_head *rmap_head,
> >
> > #define RMAP_RECYCLE_THRESHOLD 1000
> >
> > -static void rmap_add(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *spte, gfn_t gfn)
> > +static void rmap_add(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_memory_slot *slot,
> > + u64 *spte, gfn_t gfn)
> > {
> > - struct kvm_memory_slot *slot;
> > struct kvm_mmu_page *sp;
> > struct kvm_rmap_head *rmap_head;
> > int rmap_count;
> >
> > sp = sptep_to_sp(spte);
> > kvm_mmu_page_set_gfn(sp, spte - sp->spt, gfn);
> > - slot = kvm_vcpu_gfn_to_memslot(vcpu, gfn);
> > rmap_head = gfn_to_rmap(gfn, sp->role.level, slot);
> > rmap_count = pte_list_add(vcpu, spte, rmap_head);
> >
> > @@ -2679,9 +2678,9 @@ static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *sptep,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static int mmu_set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *sptep,
> > - unsigned int pte_access, bool write_fault, int level,
> > - gfn_t gfn, kvm_pfn_t pfn, bool speculative,
> > +static int mmu_set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_memory_slot *slot,
> > + u64 *sptep, unsigned int pte_access, bool write_fault,
> > + int level, gfn_t gfn, kvm_pfn_t pfn, bool speculative,
> > bool host_writable)
> > {
> > int was_rmapped = 0;
> > @@ -2744,24 +2743,12 @@ static int mmu_set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *sptep,
> >
> > if (!was_rmapped) {
> > kvm_update_page_stats(vcpu->kvm, level, 1);
> > - rmap_add(vcpu, sptep, gfn);
> > + rmap_add(vcpu, slot, sptep, gfn);
> > }
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static kvm_pfn_t pte_prefetch_gfn_to_pfn(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn,
> > - bool no_dirty_log)
> > -{
> > - struct kvm_memory_slot *slot;
> > -
> > - slot = gfn_to_memslot_dirty_bitmap(vcpu, gfn, no_dirty_log);
> > - if (!slot)
> > - return KVM_PFN_ERR_FAULT;
> > -
> > - return gfn_to_pfn_memslot_atomic(slot, gfn);
> > -}
> > -
> > static int direct_pte_prefetch_many(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> > u64 *start, u64 *end)
> > @@ -2782,7 +2769,7 @@ static int direct_pte_prefetch_many(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > return -1;
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < ret; i++, gfn++, start++) {
> > - mmu_set_spte(vcpu, start, access, false, sp->role.level, gfn,
> > + mmu_set_spte(vcpu, slot, start, access, false, sp->role.level, gfn,
> > page_to_pfn(pages[i]), true, true);
> > put_page(pages[i]);
> > }
> > @@ -2979,7 +2966,7 @@ static int __direct_map(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_page_fault *fault)
> > account_huge_nx_page(vcpu->kvm, sp);
> > }
> >
> > - ret = mmu_set_spte(vcpu, it.sptep, ACC_ALL,
> > + ret = mmu_set_spte(vcpu, fault->slot, it.sptep, ACC_ALL,
> > fault->write, fault->goal_level, base_gfn, fault->pfn,
> > fault->prefault, fault->map_writable);
> > if (ret == RET_PF_SPURIOUS)
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> > index 50ade6450ace..653ca44afa58 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/paging_tmpl.h
> > @@ -561,6 +561,7 @@ static bool
> > FNAME(prefetch_gpte)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> > u64 *spte, pt_element_t gpte, bool no_dirty_log)
> > {
> > + struct kvm_memory_slot *slot;
> > unsigned pte_access;
> > gfn_t gfn;
> > kvm_pfn_t pfn;
> > @@ -573,8 +574,13 @@ FNAME(prefetch_gpte)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> > gfn = gpte_to_gfn(gpte);
> > pte_access = sp->role.access & FNAME(gpte_access)(gpte);
> > FNAME(protect_clean_gpte)(vcpu->arch.mmu, &pte_access, gpte);
> > - pfn = pte_prefetch_gfn_to_pfn(vcpu, gfn,
> > +
> > + slot = gfn_to_memslot_dirty_bitmap(vcpu, gfn,
> > no_dirty_log && (pte_access & ACC_WRITE_MASK));
> > + if (!slot)
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + pfn = gfn_to_pfn_memslot_atomic(slot, gfn);
> > if (is_error_pfn(pfn))
> > return false;
> >
> > @@ -582,7 +588,7 @@ FNAME(prefetch_gpte)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp,
> > * we call mmu_set_spte() with host_writable = true because
> > * pte_prefetch_gfn_to_pfn always gets a writable pfn.
> > */
> > - mmu_set_spte(vcpu, spte, pte_access, false, PG_LEVEL_4K, gfn, pfn,
> > + mmu_set_spte(vcpu, slot, spte, pte_access, false, PG_LEVEL_4K, gfn, pfn,
> > true, true);
> >
> > kvm_release_pfn_clean(pfn);
> > @@ -749,7 +755,7 @@ static int FNAME(fetch)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_page_fault *fault,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - ret = mmu_set_spte(vcpu, it.sptep, gw->pte_access, fault->write,
> > + ret = mmu_set_spte(vcpu, fault->slot, it.sptep, gw->pte_access, fault->write,
> > it.level, base_gfn, fault->pfn, fault->prefault,
> > fault->map_writable);
> > if (ret == RET_PF_SPURIOUS)
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-19 16:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-13 20:34 [RFC PATCH 0/6] Pass memslot around during page fault handling David Matlack
2021-08-13 20:34 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Rename try_async_pf to kvm_faultin_pfn in comment David Matlack
2021-08-13 20:35 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Fold rmap_recycle into rmap_add David Matlack
2021-08-13 20:35 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass the memslot around via struct kvm_page_fault David Matlack
2021-08-17 13:00 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-08-17 16:13 ` David Matlack
2021-08-17 17:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-08-19 16:37 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-20 22:54 ` David Matlack
2021-08-20 23:02 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-13 20:35 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Avoid memslot lookup in page_fault_handle_page_track David Matlack
2021-08-13 20:35 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Avoid memslot lookup in rmap_add David Matlack
2021-08-17 12:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-08-19 16:15 ` David Matlack [this message]
2021-08-19 16:39 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-08-19 16:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-08-13 20:35 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] KVM: x86/mmu: Avoid memslot lookup in mmu_try_to_unsync_pages David Matlack
2021-08-17 11:12 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] Pass memslot around during page fault handling Paolo Bonzini
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='CALzav=do97h9LtbWJfDaj0xRv5Ccq5m-bPq0u0=_h8ut=M6Eow@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=bgardon@google.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).