LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
To: Zengruan Ye <yezengruan@huawei.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Cc: maz@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
	suzuki.poulose@arm.com, julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	daniel.lezcano@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] KVM: arm64: Support the VCPU preemption check
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:09:28 +0000
Message-ID: <5a1f6745-2deb-253b-7022-f2725d8d40ba@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191226135833.1052-7-yezengruan@huawei.com>

On 26/12/2019 13:58, Zengruan Ye wrote:
> Support the vcpu_is_preempted() functionality under KVM/arm64. This will
> enhance lock performance on overcommitted hosts (more runnable VCPUs
> than physical CPUs in the system) as doing busy waits for preempted
> VCPUs will hurt system performance far worse than early yielding.
> 
> unix benchmark result:
>    host:  kernel 5.5.0-rc1, HiSilicon Kunpeng920, 8 CPUs
>    guest: kernel 5.5.0-rc1, 16 VCPUs
> 
>                 test-case                |    after-patch    |   before-patch
> ----------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------
>   Dhrystone 2 using register variables   | 334600751.0 lps   | 335319028.3 lps
>   Double-Precision Whetstone             |     32856.1 MWIPS |     32849.6 MWIPS
>   Execl Throughput                       |      3662.1 lps   |      2718.0 lps
>   File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks  |    432906.4 KBps  |    158011.8 KBps
>   File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks    |    116023.0 KBps  |     37664.0 KBps
>   File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks  |   1432769.8 KBps  |    441108.8 KBps
>   Pipe Throughput                        |   6405029.6 lps   |   6021457.6 lps
>   Pipe-based Context Switching           |    185872.7 lps   |    184255.3 lps
>   Process Creation                       |      4025.7 lps   |      3706.6 lps
>   Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)           |      6745.6 lpm   |      6436.1 lpm
>   Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)           |       998.7 lpm   |       931.1 lpm
>   System Call Overhead                   |   3913363.1 lps   |   3883287.8 lps
> ----------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------
>   System Benchmarks Index Score          |      1835.1       |      1327.6
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zengruan Ye <yezengruan@huawei.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h |   3 +
>   arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c      | 117 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c         |   2 +
>   include/linux/cpuhotplug.h        |   1 +
>   4 files changed, 123 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h
> index 7b1c81b544bb..ca3a2c7881f3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/paravirt.h
> @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ static inline u64 paravirt_steal_clock(int cpu)
>   
>   int __init pv_time_init(void);
>   
> +int __init pv_lock_init(void);
> +
>   __visible bool __native_vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu);
>   
>   static inline bool pv_vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
> @@ -39,6 +41,7 @@ static inline bool pv_vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
>   #else
>   
>   #define pv_time_init() do {} while (0)
> +#define pv_lock_init() do {} while (0)
>   
>   #endif // CONFIG_PARAVIRT
>   
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
> index d8f1ba8c22ce..bd2ad6a17a26 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/paravirt.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>   #include <asm/paravirt.h>
>   #include <asm/pvclock-abi.h>
>   #include <asm/smp_plat.h>
> +#include <asm/pvlock-abi.h>
>   
>   struct static_key paravirt_steal_enabled;
>   struct static_key paravirt_steal_rq_enabled;
> @@ -35,6 +36,10 @@ struct pv_time_stolen_time_region {
>   	struct pvclock_vcpu_stolen_time *kaddr;
>   };
>   
> +struct pv_lock_state_region {
> +	struct pvlock_vcpu_state *kaddr;
> +};
> +
>   static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pv_time_stolen_time_region, stolen_time_region);
>   
>   static bool steal_acc = true;
> @@ -158,3 +163,115 @@ int __init pv_time_init(void)
>   
>   	return 0;
>   }
> +
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pv_lock_state_region, lock_state_region);
> +
> +static bool kvm_vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
> +{
> +	struct pv_lock_state_region *reg;
> +	__le64 preempted_le;
> +
> +	reg = per_cpu_ptr(&lock_state_region, cpu);
> +	if (!reg->kaddr) {
> +		pr_warn_once("PV lock enabled but not configured for cpu %d\n",
> +			     cpu);
> +		return false;
> +	}
> +
> +	preempted_le = le64_to_cpu(READ_ONCE(reg->kaddr->preempted));
> +
> +	return !!(preempted_le & 1);

According to the documentation preempted != 0 means preempted, but here you are checking the LSB. You need to be consistent about the ABI.

> +}
> +
> +static int pvlock_vcpu_state_dying_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +	struct pv_lock_state_region *reg;
> +
> +	reg = this_cpu_ptr(&lock_state_region);
> +	if (!reg->kaddr)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	memunmap(reg->kaddr);
> +	memset(reg, 0, sizeof(*reg));
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int init_pvlock_vcpu_state(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +	struct pv_lock_state_region *reg;
> +	struct arm_smccc_res res;
> +
> +	reg = this_cpu_ptr(&lock_state_region);
> +
> +	arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_HV_PV_LOCK_PREEMPTED, &res);
> +
> +	if (res.a0 == SMCCC_RET_NOT_SUPPORTED) {
> +		pr_warn("Failed to init PV lock data structure\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
> +	reg->kaddr = memremap(res.a0,
> +			      sizeof(struct pvlock_vcpu_state),
> +			      MEMREMAP_WB);
> +
> +	if (!reg->kaddr) {
> +		pr_warn("Failed to map PV lock data structure\n");
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int kvm_arm_init_pvlock(void)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_ARM_KVM_PVLOCK_STARTING,
> +				"hypervisor/arm/pvlock:starting",
> +				init_pvlock_vcpu_state,
> +				pvlock_vcpu_state_dying_cpu);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		pr_warn("PV-lock init failed\n");
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static bool has_kvm_pvlock(void)
> +{
> +	struct arm_smccc_res res;
> +
> +	/* To detect the presence of PV lock support we require SMCCC 1.1+ */
> +	if (psci_ops.smccc_version < SMCCC_VERSION_1_1)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_ARCH_FEATURES_FUNC_ID,
> +			     ARM_SMCCC_HV_PV_LOCK_FEATURES, &res);

As mentioned previously we could do with something more robust to check that the hypervisor is actually KVM before assuming that vendor specific IDs are valid.

Steve

> +
> +	if (res.a0 != SMCCC_RET_SUCCESS)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	return true;
> +}
> +
> +int __init pv_lock_init(void)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	if (is_hyp_mode_available())
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if (!has_kvm_pvlock())
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	ret = kvm_arm_init_pvlock();
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	pv_ops.lock.vcpu_is_preempted = kvm_vcpu_is_preempted;
> +	pr_info("using PV-lock preempted\n");
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> index 56f664561754..aa3a8b9e710f 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -341,6 +341,8 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
>   	smp_init_cpus();
>   	smp_build_mpidr_hash();
>   
> +	pv_lock_init();
> +
>   	/* Init percpu seeds for random tags after cpus are set up. */
>   	kasan_init_tags();
>   
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
> index e51ee772b9f5..f72ff95ab63a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
> @@ -138,6 +138,7 @@ enum cpuhp_state {
>   	CPUHP_AP_DUMMY_TIMER_STARTING,
>   	CPUHP_AP_ARM_XEN_STARTING,
>   	CPUHP_AP_ARM_KVMPV_STARTING,
> +	CPUHP_AP_ARM_KVM_PVLOCK_STARTING,
>   	CPUHP_AP_ARM_CORESIGHT_STARTING,
>   	CPUHP_AP_ARM64_ISNDEP_STARTING,
>   	CPUHP_AP_SMPCFD_DYING,
> 


  reply index

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-26 13:58 [PATCH v2 0/6] KVM: arm64: VCPU preempted check support Zengruan Ye
2019-12-26 13:58 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] KVM: arm64: Document PV-lock interface Zengruan Ye
2020-01-09 14:53   ` Steven Price
2020-01-11  6:51     ` yezengruan
2019-12-26 13:58 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] KVM: arm64: Add SMCCC paravirtualised lock calls Zengruan Ye
2019-12-26 13:58 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] KVM: arm64: Support pvlock preempted via shared structure Zengruan Ye
2020-01-09 15:02   ` Steven Price
2020-01-11  7:30     ` yezengruan
2020-01-13 10:31       ` Steven Price
2019-12-26 13:58 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] KVM: arm64: Provide VCPU attributes for PV lock Zengruan Ye
2019-12-26 13:58 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] KVM: arm64: Add interface to support VCPU preempted check Zengruan Ye
2019-12-26 18:51   ` kbuild test robot
2019-12-27  6:52     ` yezengruan
2019-12-26 13:58 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] KVM: arm64: Support the VCPU preemption check Zengruan Ye
2020-01-09 15:09   ` Steven Price [this message]
2020-01-11  7:33     ` yezengruan
2020-01-13 12:12 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] KVM: arm64: VCPU preempted check support Will Deacon
2020-01-15 14:14   ` Marc Zyngier

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=5a1f6745-2deb-253b-7022-f2725d8d40ba@arm.com \
    --to=steven.price@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yezengruan@huawei.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

LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/0 lkml/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1 lkml/git/1.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2 lkml/git/2.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3 lkml/git/3.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4 lkml/git/4.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5 lkml/git/5.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6 lkml/git/6.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7 lkml/git/7.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8 lkml/git/8.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 lkml lkml/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml \
		linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index lkml

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git