From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@linux.ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>,
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>,
Michael Mueller <mimu@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] virtio: decouple protected guest RAM form VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 01:06:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200224010607-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0181712c-e533-fcfd-2638-8a0649d713dd@redhat.com>
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 12:01:57PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2020/2/21 下午10:56, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 14:22:26 +0800
> > Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 2020/2/21 上午12:06, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > > > Currently if one intends to run a memory protection enabled VM with
> > > > virtio devices and linux as the guest OS, one needs to specify the
> > > > VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM flag for each virtio device to make the guest
> > > > linux use the DMA API, which in turn handles the memory
> > > > encryption/protection stuff if the guest decides to turn itself into
> > > > a protected one. This however makes no sense due to multiple reasons:
> > > > * The device is not changed by the fact that the guest RAM is
> > > > protected. The so called IOMMU bypass quirk is not affected.
> > > > * This usage is not congruent with standardised semantics of
> > > > VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM. Guest memory protected is an orthogonal reason
> > > > for using DMA API in virtio (orthogonal with respect to what is
> > > > expressed by VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM).
> > > >
> > > > This series aims to decouple 'have to use DMA API because my (guest) RAM
> > > > is protected' and 'have to use DMA API because the device told me
> > > > VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM'.
> > > >
> > > > Please find more detailed explanations about the conceptual aspects in
> > > > the individual patches. There is however also a very practical problem
> > > > that is addressed by this series.
> > > >
> > > > For vhost-net the feature VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM has the following side
> > > > effect The vhost code assumes it the addresses on the virtio descriptor
> > > > ring are not guest physical addresses but iova's, and insists on doing a
> > > > translation of these regardless of what transport is used (e.g. whether
> > > > we emulate a PCI or a CCW device). (For details see commit 6b1e6cc7855b
> > > > "vhost: new device IOTLB API".) On s390 this results in severe
> > > > performance degradation (c.a. factor 10).
> > >
> > > Do you see a consistent degradation on the performance, or it only
> > > happen when for during the beginning of the test?
> > >
> > AFAIK the degradation is consistent.
> >
> > > > BTW with ccw I/O there is
> > > > (architecturally) no IOMMU, so the whole address translation makes no
> > > > sense in the context of virtio-ccw.
> > >
> > > I suspect we can do optimization in qemu side.
> > >
> > > E.g send memtable entry via IOTLB API when vIOMMU is not enabled.
> > >
> > > If this makes sense, I can draft patch to see if there's any difference.
> > Frankly I would prefer to avoid IOVAs on the descriptor ring (and the
> > then necessary translation) for virtio-ccw altogether. But Michael
> > voiced his opinion that we should mandate F_IOMMU_PLATFORM for devices
> > that could be used with guests running in protected mode. I don't share
> > his opinion, but that's an ongoing discussion.
> >
> > Should we end up having to do translation from IOVA in vhost, we are
> > very interested in that translation being fast and efficient.
> >
> > In that sense we would be very happy to test any optimization that aim
> > into that direction.
> >
> > Thank you very much for your input!
>
>
> Using IOTLB API on platform without IOMMU support is not intended. Please
> try the attached patch to see if it helps.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Halil
> >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > > Halil Pasic (2):
> > > > mm: move force_dma_unencrypted() to mem_encrypt.h
> > > > virtio: let virtio use DMA API when guest RAM is protected
> > > >
> > > > drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 3 +++
> > > > include/linux/dma-direct.h | 9 ---------
> > > > include/linux/mem_encrypt.h | 10 ++++++++++
> > > > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > base-commit: ca7e1fd1026c5af6a533b4b5447e1d2f153e28f2
> >From 66fa730460875ac99e81d7db2334cd16bb1d2b27 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 12:00:10 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] virtio: turn on IOMMU_PLATFORM properly
>
> When transport does not support IOMMU, we should clear IOMMU_PLATFORM
> even if the device and vhost claims to support that. This help to
> avoid the performance overhead caused by unnecessary IOTLB miss/update
> transactions on such platform.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
> ---
> hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c b/hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c
> index d6332d45c3..2741b9fdd2 100644
> --- a/hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c
> +++ b/hw/virtio/virtio-bus.c
> @@ -47,7 +47,6 @@ void virtio_bus_device_plugged(VirtIODevice *vdev, Error **errp)
> VirtioBusState *bus = VIRTIO_BUS(qbus);
> VirtioBusClass *klass = VIRTIO_BUS_GET_CLASS(bus);
> VirtioDeviceClass *vdc = VIRTIO_DEVICE_GET_CLASS(vdev);
> - bool has_iommu = virtio_host_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM);
> Error *local_err = NULL;
>
> DPRINTF("%s: plug device.\n", qbus->name);
> @@ -77,10 +76,11 @@ void virtio_bus_device_plugged(VirtIODevice *vdev, Error **errp)
> return;
> }
>
> - if (klass->get_dma_as != NULL && has_iommu) {
> - virtio_add_feature(&vdev->host_features, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM);
> + if (false && klass->get_dma_as != NULL &&
> + virtio_host_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM)) {
> vdev->dma_as = klass->get_dma_as(qbus->parent);
> } else {
> + virtio_clear_feature(&vdev->host_features, VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM);
> vdev->dma_as = &address_space_memory;
> }
> }
This seems to clear it unconditionally. I guess it's just a debugging
patch, the real one will come later?
> --
> 2.19.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-24 6:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-20 16:06 [PATCH 0/2] virtio: decouple protected guest RAM form VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM Halil Pasic
2020-02-20 16:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: move force_dma_unencrypted() to mem_encrypt.h Halil Pasic
2020-02-20 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-20 16:23 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-20 16:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-20 17:00 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-02-21 3:27 ` David Gibson
2020-02-21 13:06 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-21 15:48 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-21 18:07 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-24 3:33 ` David Gibson
2020-02-24 18:49 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-25 18:08 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-02-28 0:23 ` David Gibson
2020-02-20 16:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] virtio: let virtio use DMA API when guest RAM is protected Halil Pasic
2020-02-20 16:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 2:59 ` David Gibson
2020-02-21 3:41 ` Jason Wang
2020-02-21 13:31 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-21 13:27 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-21 16:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-24 6:50 ` David Gibson
2020-02-24 18:59 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-21 14:33 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-21 16:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 18:16 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-22 19:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-24 17:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
[not found] ` <691d8c8e-665c-b05f-383f-78377fcf6741@amazon.com>
2020-10-28 18:01 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-20 20:55 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-21 1:17 ` Ram Pai
2020-02-21 3:29 ` David Gibson
2020-02-21 13:12 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-21 15:39 ` Tom Lendacky
2020-02-24 6:40 ` David Gibson
2020-02-21 15:56 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-21 16:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 18:03 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-20 20:48 ` [PATCH 0/2] virtio: decouple protected guest RAM form VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-20 21:29 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-21 13:37 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-20 21:33 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-21 13:49 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-21 16:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-24 5:44 ` David Gibson
2020-02-21 6:22 ` Jason Wang
2020-02-21 14:56 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-24 3:38 ` David Gibson
2020-02-24 4:01 ` Jason Wang
2020-02-24 6:06 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2020-02-24 6:45 ` Jason Wang
2020-02-24 7:48 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-24 9:26 ` Jason Wang
2020-02-24 13:40 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-02-25 3:38 ` Jason Wang
2020-02-24 13:56 ` Halil Pasic
2020-02-25 3:30 ` Jason Wang
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=20200224010607-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=bauerman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=mihajlov@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mimu@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/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).