linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: avi.kivity@gmail.com, mtosatti@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/15] KVM: MMU: locklessly write-protect
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:33:57 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52806C45.6090102@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131103122904.GA3963@redhat.com>

On 11/03/2013 08:29 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> Marcelo can you review it please?
> 

Ping......

> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 09:29:18PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> Changelog v3:
>> - the changes from Gleb's review:
>>   1) drop the patch which fixed the count of spte number in rmap since it
>>      can not be easily fixed and it has gone after applying this patchset
>>
>> - ideas from Gleb and discussion with Marcelo is also very appreciated:
>>   2) change the way to locklessly access shadow page - use SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU
>>      to protect shadow page instead of conditionally using call_rcu()
>>   3) improve is_last_spte() that checks last spte by only using some bits on
>>      the spte, then it is safely used when we locklessly write-protect the
>>      shadow page table
>>
>> Changelog v2:
>>
>> - the changes from Gleb's review:
>>   1) fix calculating the number of spte in the pte_list_add()
>>   2) set iter->desc to NULL if meet a nulls desc to cleanup the code of
>>      rmap_get_next()
>>   3) fix hlist corruption due to accessing sp->hlish out of mmu-lock
>>   4) use rcu functions to access the rcu protected pointer
>>   5) spte will be missed in lockless walker if the spte is moved in a desc
>>      (remove a spte from the rmap using only one desc). Fix it by bottom-up
>>      walking the desc
>>
>> - the changes from Paolo's review
>>   1) make the order and memory barriers between update spte / add spte into
>>      rmap and dirty-log more clear
>>   
>> - the changes from Marcelo's review:
>>   1) let fast page fault only fix the spts on the last level (level = 1)
>>   2) improve some changelogs and comments
>>
>> - the changes from Takuya's review:
>>   move the patch "flush tlb if the spte can be locklessly modified" forward
>>   to make it's more easily merged
>>
>> Thank all of you very much for your time and patience on this patchset!
>>   
>> Since we use rcu_assign_pointer() to update the points in desc even if dirty
>> log is disabled, i have measured the performance:
>> Host: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           X5690  @ 3.47GHz * 12 + 36G memory
>>
>> - migrate-perf (benchmark the time of get-dirty-log)
>>   before: Run 10 times, Avg time:9009483 ns.
>>   after: Run 10 times, Avg time:4807343 ns.
>>
>> - kerbench
>>   Guest: 12 VCPUs + 8G memory
>>   before:
>> EPT is enabled:
>> # cat 09-05-origin-ept | grep real       
>> real 85.58
>> real 83.47
>> real 82.95
>>
>> EPT is disabled:
>> # cat 09-05-origin-shadow | grep real
>> real 138.77
>> real 138.99
>> real 139.55
>>
>>   after:
>> EPT is enabled:
>> # cat 09-05-lockless-ept | grep real
>> real 83.40
>> real 82.81
>> real 83.39
>>
>> EPT is disabled:
>> # cat 09-05-lockless-shadow | grep real
>> real 138.91
>> real 139.71
>> real 138.94
>>
>> No performance regression!
>>
>>
>>
>> Background
>> ==========
>> Currently, when mark memslot dirty logged or get dirty page, we need to
>> write-protect large guest memory, it is the heavy work, especially, we need to
>> hold mmu-lock which is also required by vcpu to fix its page table fault and
>> mmu-notifier when host page is being changed. In the extreme cpu / memory used
>> guest, it becomes a scalability issue.
>>
>> This patchset introduces a way to locklessly write-protect guest memory.
>>
>> Idea
>> ==========
>> There are the challenges we meet and the ideas to resolve them.
>>
>> 1) How to locklessly walk rmap?
>> The first idea we got to prevent "desc" being freed when we are walking the
>> rmap is using RCU. But when vcpu runs on shadow page mode or nested mmu mode,
>> it updates the rmap really frequently.
>>
>> So we uses SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU to manage "desc" instead, it allows the object
>> to be reused more quickly. We also store a "nulls" in the last "desc"
>> (desc->more) which can help us to detect whether the "desc" is moved to anther
>> rmap then we can re-walk the rmap if that happened. I learned this idea from
>> nulls-list.
>>
>> Another issue is, when a spte is deleted from the "desc", another spte in the
>> last "desc" will be moved to this position to replace the deleted one. If the
>> deleted one has been accessed and we do not access the replaced one, the
>> replaced one is missed when we do lockless walk.
>> To fix this case, we do not backward move the spte, instead, we forward move
>> the entry: when a spte is deleted, we move the entry in the first desc to that
>> position.
>>
>> 2) How to locklessly access shadow page table?
>> It is easy if the handler is in the vcpu context, in that case we can use
>> walk_shadow_page_lockless_begin() and walk_shadow_page_lockless_end() that
>> disable interrupt to stop shadow page be freed. But we are on the ioctl context
>> and the paths we are optimizing for have heavy workload, disabling interrupt is
>> not good for the system performance.
>>
>> We add a indicator into kvm struct (kvm->arch.rcu_free_shadow_page), then use
>> call_rcu() to free the shadow page if that indicator is set. Set/Clear the
>> indicator are protected by slot-lock, so it need not be atomic and does not
>> hurt the performance and the scalability.
>>
>> 3) How to locklessly write-protect guest memory?
>> Currently, there are two behaviors when we write-protect guest memory, one is
>> clearing the Writable bit on spte and the another one is dropping spte when it
>> points to large page. The former is easy we only need to atomicly clear a bit
>> but the latter is hard since we need to remove the spte from rmap. so we unify
>> these two behaviors that only make the spte readonly. Making large spte
>> readonly instead of nonpresent is also good for reducing jitter.
>>
>> And we need to pay more attention on the order of making spte writable, adding
>> spte into rmap and setting the corresponding bit on dirty bitmap since
>> kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log() write-protects the spte based on the dirty bitmap,
>> we should ensure the writable spte can be found in rmap before the dirty bitmap
>> is visible. Otherwise, we cleared the dirty bitmap and failed to write-protect
>> the page.
>>
>> Performance result
>> ====================
>> The performance result and the benchmark can be found at:
>>   http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1534876
>>
>> Xiao Guangrong (15):
>>   KVM: MMU: properly check last spte in fast_page_fault()
>>   KVM: MMU: lazily drop large spte
>>   KVM: MMU: flush tlb if the spte can be locklessly modified
>>   KVM: MMU: flush tlb out of mmu lock when write-protect the sptes
>>   KVM: MMU: update spte and add it into rmap before dirty log
>>   KVM: MMU: redesign the algorithm of pte_list
>>   KVM: MMU: introduce nulls desc
>>   KVM: MMU: introduce pte-list lockless walker
>>   KVM: MMU: initialize the pointers in pte_list_desc properly
>>   KVM: MMU: allocate shadow pages from slab
>>   KVM: MMU: locklessly access shadow page under rcu protection
>>   KVM: MMU: check last spte with unawareness of mapping level
>>   KVM: MMU: locklessly write-protect the page
>>   KVM: MMU: clean up spte_write_protect
>>   KVM: MMU: use rcu functions to access the pointer
>>
>>  arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h |   7 +-
>>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c              | 586 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu.h              |   6 +
>>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu_audit.c        |   6 +-
>>  arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h      |   6 +-
>>  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c              |  34 ++-
>>  6 files changed, 475 insertions(+), 170 deletions(-)
>>
>> -- 
>> 1.8.1.4
> 
> --
> 			Gleb.
> 
> 


      reply	other threads:[~2013-11-11  5:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-23 13:29 [PATCH v3 00/15] KVM: MMU: locklessly write-protect Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 01/15] KVM: MMU: properly check last spte in fast_page_fault() Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-12  0:25   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 02/15] KVM: MMU: lazily drop large spte Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-12 22:44   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 03/15] KVM: MMU: flush tlb if the spte can be locklessly modified Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-13  0:10   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 04/15] KVM: MMU: flush tlb out of mmu lock when write-protect the sptes Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-14  0:36   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-14  5:15     ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-14 18:39       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-15  7:09         ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-19  0:19           ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 05/15] KVM: MMU: update spte and add it into rmap before dirty log Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-15  0:08   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 06/15] KVM: MMU: redesign the algorithm of pte_list Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-19  0:48   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 07/15] KVM: MMU: introduce nulls desc Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-22 19:14   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-25  6:11     ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-25  6:29       ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-25 18:12         ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-26  3:21           ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-26 10:12             ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-26 19:31             ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-28  8:53               ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-12-03  7:10                 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-12-05 13:50                   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-12-05 15:30                     ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-12-06  0:15                       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-12-06  0:22                       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-12-10  6:58                         ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-25 10:19       ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-25 10:25         ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-25 12:48       ` Avi Kivity
2013-11-25 14:23         ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-25 14:29           ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-25 18:06             ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-26  3:10           ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-26 10:15             ` Gleb Natapov
2013-11-26 19:58             ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-28  8:32               ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-25 14:08       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-11-26  3:02         ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-25  9:31     ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-25 10:59       ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-25 11:05         ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-25 11:29           ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 08/15] KVM: MMU: introduce pte-list lockless walker Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 09/15] KVM: MMU: initialize the pointers in pte_list_desc properly Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 10/15] KVM: MMU: allocate shadow pages from slab Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-24  9:19   ` Gleb Natapov
2013-10-24  9:29     ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-24  9:52       ` Gleb Natapov
2013-10-24 10:10         ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-24 10:39           ` Gleb Natapov
2013-10-24 11:01             ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-24 12:32               ` Gleb Natapov
2013-10-28  3:16                 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 11/15] KVM: MMU: locklessly access shadow page under rcu protection Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 12/15] KVM: MMU: check last spte with unawareness of mapping level Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 13/15] KVM: MMU: locklessly write-protect the page Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-24  9:17   ` Gleb Natapov
2013-10-24  9:24     ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-24  9:32       ` Gleb Natapov
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 14/15] KVM: MMU: clean up spte_write_protect Xiao Guangrong
2013-10-23 13:29 ` [PATCH v3 15/15] KVM: MMU: use rcu functions to access the pointer Xiao Guangrong
2013-11-03 12:29 ` [PATCH v3 00/15] KVM: MMU: locklessly write-protect Gleb Natapov
2013-11-11  5:33   ` Xiao Guangrong [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=52806C45.6090102@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=avi.kivity@gmail.com \
    --cc=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@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 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).