All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
	Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 10/10] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow yielding during MMU notifier unmap/zap, if possible
Date: Thu,  1 Apr 2021 17:56:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210402005658.3024832-11-seanjc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210402005658.3024832-1-seanjc@google.com>

Let the TDP MMU yield when unmapping a range in response to a MMU
notification, if yielding is allowed by said notification.  There is no
reason to disallow yielding in this case, and in theory the range being
invalidated could be quite large.

Cc: Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
index 7797d24f0937..dd17d9673ff2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
@@ -885,7 +885,7 @@ bool kvm_tdp_mmu_unmap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range,
 
 	for_each_tdp_mmu_root(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id)
 		flush |= zap_gfn_range(kvm, root, range->start, range->end,
-				       false, flush);
+				       range->may_block, flush);
 
 	return flush;
 }
@@ -903,6 +903,10 @@ static __always_inline bool kvm_tdp_mmu_handle_gfn(struct kvm *kvm,
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 
+	/*
+	 * Don't support rescheduling, none of the MMU notifiers that funnel
+	 * into this helper allow blocking; it'd be dead, wasteful code.
+	 */
 	for_each_tdp_mmu_root(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id) {
 		tdp_root_for_each_leaf_pte(iter, root, range->start, range->end)
 			ret |= handler(kvm, &iter, range);
-- 
2.31.0.208.g409f899ff0-goog


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
	 Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 10/10] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow yielding during MMU notifier unmap/zap, if possible
Date: Thu,  1 Apr 2021 17:56:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210402005658.3024832-11-seanjc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210402005658.3024832-1-seanjc@google.com>

Let the TDP MMU yield when unmapping a range in response to a MMU
notification, if yielding is allowed by said notification.  There is no
reason to disallow yielding in this case, and in theory the range being
invalidated could be quite large.

Cc: Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
index 7797d24f0937..dd17d9673ff2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
@@ -885,7 +885,7 @@ bool kvm_tdp_mmu_unmap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range,
 
 	for_each_tdp_mmu_root(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id)
 		flush |= zap_gfn_range(kvm, root, range->start, range->end,
-				       false, flush);
+				       range->may_block, flush);
 
 	return flush;
 }
@@ -903,6 +903,10 @@ static __always_inline bool kvm_tdp_mmu_handle_gfn(struct kvm *kvm,
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 
+	/*
+	 * Don't support rescheduling, none of the MMU notifiers that funnel
+	 * into this helper allow blocking; it'd be dead, wasteful code.
+	 */
 	for_each_tdp_mmu_root(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id) {
 		tdp_root_for_each_leaf_pte(iter, root, range->start, range->end)
 			ret |= handler(kvm, &iter, range);
-- 
2.31.0.208.g409f899ff0-goog

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
	 Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	 Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	 Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	 Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,  linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 10/10] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow yielding during MMU notifier unmap/zap, if possible
Date: Thu,  1 Apr 2021 17:56:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210402005658.3024832-11-seanjc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210402005658.3024832-1-seanjc@google.com>

Let the TDP MMU yield when unmapping a range in response to a MMU
notification, if yielding is allowed by said notification.  There is no
reason to disallow yielding in this case, and in theory the range being
invalidated could be quite large.

Cc: Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
index 7797d24f0937..dd17d9673ff2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
@@ -885,7 +885,7 @@ bool kvm_tdp_mmu_unmap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range,
 
 	for_each_tdp_mmu_root(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id)
 		flush |= zap_gfn_range(kvm, root, range->start, range->end,
-				       false, flush);
+				       range->may_block, flush);
 
 	return flush;
 }
@@ -903,6 +903,10 @@ static __always_inline bool kvm_tdp_mmu_handle_gfn(struct kvm *kvm,
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 
+	/*
+	 * Don't support rescheduling, none of the MMU notifiers that funnel
+	 * into this helper allow blocking; it'd be dead, wasteful code.
+	 */
 	for_each_tdp_mmu_root(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id) {
 		tdp_root_for_each_leaf_pte(iter, root, range->start, range->end)
 			ret |= handler(kvm, &iter, range);
-- 
2.31.0.208.g409f899ff0-goog


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
	Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 10/10] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow yielding during MMU notifier unmap/zap, if possible
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2021 00:56:58 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210402005658.3024832-11-seanjc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210402005658.3024832-1-seanjc@google.com>

Let the TDP MMU yield when unmapping a range in response to a MMU
notification, if yielding is allowed by said notification.  There is no
reason to disallow yielding in this case, and in theory the range being
invalidated could be quite large.

Cc: Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
index 7797d24f0937..dd17d9673ff2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
@@ -885,7 +885,7 @@ bool kvm_tdp_mmu_unmap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range,
 
 	for_each_tdp_mmu_root(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id)
 		flush |= zap_gfn_range(kvm, root, range->start, range->end,
-				       false, flush);
+				       range->may_block, flush);
 
 	return flush;
 }
@@ -903,6 +903,10 @@ static __always_inline bool kvm_tdp_mmu_handle_gfn(struct kvm *kvm,
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 
+	/*
+	 * Don't support rescheduling, none of the MMU notifiers that funnel
+	 * into this helper allow blocking; it'd be dead, wasteful code.
+	 */
 	for_each_tdp_mmu_root(kvm, root, range->slot->as_id) {
 		tdp_root_for_each_leaf_pte(iter, root, range->start, range->end)
 			ret |= handler(kvm, &iter, range);
-- 
2.31.0.208.g409f899ff0-goog

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-04-02  0:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 84+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-02  0:56 [PATCH v2 00/10] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] KVM: Assert that notifier count is elevated in .change_pte() Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02 11:08   ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02 11:08     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02 11:08     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02 11:08     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] KVM: Move x86's MMU notifier memslot walkers to generic code Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] KVM: arm64: Convert to the gfn-based MMU notifier callbacks Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-12 10:12   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-04-12 10:12     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-04-12 10:12     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-04-12 10:12     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] KVM: MIPS/MMU: " Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] KVM: PPC: " Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] KVM: Kill off the old hva-based " Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] KVM: Move MMU notifier's mmu_lock acquisition into common helper Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  9:35   ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02  9:35     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02  9:35     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02  9:35     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02 14:59     ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02 14:59       ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02 14:59       ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02 14:59       ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] KVM: Take mmu_lock when handling MMU notifier iff the hva hits a memslot Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] KVM: Don't take mmu_lock for range invalidation unless necessary Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  9:34   ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02  9:34     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02  9:34     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02  9:34     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02 14:59     ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02 14:59       ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02 14:59       ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02 14:59       ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-19  8:49   ` Wanpeng Li
2021-04-19  8:49     ` Wanpeng Li
2021-04-19  8:49     ` Wanpeng Li
2021-04-19  8:49     ` Wanpeng Li
2021-04-19 13:50     ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-19 15:09       ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-19 22:09         ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-20  1:17           ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2021-04-02  0:56   ` [PATCH v2 10/10] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow yielding during MMU notifier unmap/zap, if possible Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02  0:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-02 12:17 ` [PATCH v2 00/10] KVM: Consolidate and optimize MMU notifiers Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02 12:17   ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02 12:17   ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-02 12:17   ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-04-12 10:27   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-04-12 10:27     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-04-12 10:27     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-04-12 10:27     ` 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=20210402005658.3024832-11-seanjc@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com \
    --cc=bgardon@google.com \
    --cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=jmattson@google.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
    --cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.