From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> To: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maz@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, jean-philippe@linaro.org, Alexandru.Elisei@arm.com, linuxarm@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] kvm/arm: Introduce a new vmid allocator for KVM Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 17:06:14 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210721160614.GC11003@willie-the-truck> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210616155606.2806-3-shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 04:56:05PM +0100, Shameer Kolothum wrote: > A new VMID allocator for arm64 KVM use. This is based on > arm64 asid allocator algorithm. > > Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 4 + > arch/arm64/kvm/vmid.c | 206 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 210 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kvm/vmid.c Generally, I prefer this to the alternative of creating a library. However, I'd probably remove all the duplicated comments in favour of a reference to the ASID allocator. That way, we can just comment any VMID-specific behaviour in here. Some comments below... > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > index 7cd7d5c8c4bc..75a7e8071012 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h > @@ -680,6 +680,10 @@ int kvm_arm_pvtime_get_attr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > int kvm_arm_pvtime_has_attr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > struct kvm_device_attr *attr); > > +int kvm_arm_vmid_alloc_init(void); > +void kvm_arm_vmid_alloc_free(void); > +void kvm_arm_update_vmid(atomic64_t *id); > + > static inline void kvm_arm_pvtime_vcpu_init(struct kvm_vcpu_arch *vcpu_arch) > { > vcpu_arch->steal.base = GPA_INVALID; > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/vmid.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/vmid.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..687e18d33130 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/vmid.c > @@ -0,0 +1,206 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +/* > + * VMID allocator. > + * > + * Based on arch/arm64/mm/context.c > + * > + * Copyright (C) 2002-2003 Deep Blue Solutions Ltd, all rights reserved. > + * Copyright (C) 2012 ARM Ltd. > + */ > + > +#include <linux/bitfield.h> > +#include <linux/bitops.h> > + > +#include <asm/kvm_asm.h> > +#include <asm/kvm_mmu.h> > + > +static u32 vmid_bits; > +static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(cpu_vmid_lock); > + > +static atomic64_t vmid_generation; > +static unsigned long *vmid_map; > + > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(atomic64_t, active_vmids); > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(u64, reserved_vmids); > +static cpumask_t tlb_flush_pending; > + > +#define VMID_MASK (~GENMASK(vmid_bits - 1, 0)) > +#define VMID_FIRST_VERSION (1UL << vmid_bits) > + > +#define NUM_USER_VMIDS VMID_FIRST_VERSION > +#define vmid2idx(vmid) ((vmid) & ~VMID_MASK) > +#define idx2vmid(idx) vmid2idx(idx) > + > +#define vmid_gen_match(vmid) \ > + (!(((vmid) ^ atomic64_read(&vmid_generation)) >> vmid_bits)) > + > +static void flush_context(void) > +{ > + int cpu; > + u64 vmid; > + > + bitmap_clear(vmid_map, 0, NUM_USER_VMIDS); > + > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { > + vmid = atomic64_xchg_relaxed(&per_cpu(active_vmids, cpu), 0); > + /* > + * If this CPU has already been through a > + * rollover, but hasn't run another task in > + * the meantime, we must preserve its reserved > + * VMID, as this is the only trace we have of > + * the process it is still running. > + */ > + if (vmid == 0) > + vmid = per_cpu(reserved_vmids, cpu); > + __set_bit(vmid2idx(vmid), vmid_map); > + per_cpu(reserved_vmids, cpu) = vmid; > + } Hmm, so here we're copying the active_vmids into the reserved_vmids on a rollover, but I wonder if that's overly pessismistic? For the ASID allocator, every CPU tends to have a current task so it makes sense, but I'm not sure it's necessarily the case that every CPU tends to have a vCPU as the current task. For example, imagine you have a nasty 128-CPU system with 8-bit VMIDs and each CPU has at some point run a vCPU. Then, on rollover, we'll immediately reserve half of the VMID space, even if those vCPUs don't even exist any more. Not sure if it's worth worrying about, but I wanted to mention it. > +void kvm_arm_update_vmid(atomic64_t *id) > +{ Take the kvm_vmid here? That would make: > + /* Check that our VMID belongs to the current generation. */ > + vmid = atomic64_read(id); > + if (!vmid_gen_match(vmid)) { > + vmid = new_vmid(id); > + atomic64_set(id, vmid); > + } A bit more readable, as you could pass the pointer directly to new_vmid for initialisation. Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-21 16:06 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-06-16 15:56 [PATCH v2 0/3] kvm/arm: New VMID allocator based on asid Shameer Kolothum 2021-06-16 15:56 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] arch/arm64: Introduce a capability to tell whether 16-bit VMID is available Shameer Kolothum 2021-07-21 15:23 ` Will Deacon 2021-07-22 6:24 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi 2021-06-16 15:56 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] kvm/arm: Introduce a new vmid allocator for KVM Shameer Kolothum 2021-07-21 16:06 ` Will Deacon [this message] 2021-07-22 6:34 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi 2021-06-16 15:56 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] kvm/arm: Align the VMID allocation with the arm64 ASID one Shameer Kolothum 2021-07-21 16:31 ` Will Deacon 2021-07-22 6:45 ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi 2021-07-22 9:11 ` Quentin Perret 2021-07-22 19:33 ` Marco Elver 2021-07-22 9:50 ` Will Deacon 2021-07-22 15:22 ` Vladimir Murzin 2021-07-22 15:38 ` Will Deacon 2021-07-23 15:49 ` Vladimir Murzin 2021-07-13 7:07 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] kvm/arm: New VMID allocator based on asid Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
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=20210721160614.GC11003@willie-the-truck \ --to=will@kernel.org \ --cc=Alexandru.Elisei@arm.com \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=james.morse@arm.com \ --cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \ --cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \ --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \ --cc=maz@kernel.org \ --cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \ --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \ --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] kvm/arm: Introduce a new vmid allocator for KVM' \ /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
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).