From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
AndrewCooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/9] x86/mm: honor opt_pcid also for 32-bit PV domains
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 12:45:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56a7bf8f-74b6-7d69-f6e5-30644e677869@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190912103441.le4zets5ey73uxwl@Air-de-Roger>
On 12.09.2019 12:34, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 05:22:51PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> I can't see any technical or performance reason why we should treat
>> 32-bit PV different from 64-bit PV in this regard.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>
> The original commit mentions that PCID doesn't improve performance for
> non-XPTI domains, but it doesn't mention whether it makes performance
> worse.
Well, yes - it's not like we're defaulting to using PCID now for
32-bit guests. But we allow people to turn on its use. After all
the original measurements were done on a limited set of hardware,
and hardware also changes/advances all the time.
> The change LGTM, if you are fine performance wise:
>
> Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Thanks.
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/pv/domain.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/pv/domain.c
>> @@ -180,7 +180,24 @@ int switch_compat(struct domain *d)
>> d->arch.x87_fip_width = 4;
>>
>> d->arch.pv.xpti = false;
>> - d->arch.pv.pcid = false;
>> +
>> + if ( use_invpcid && cpu_has_pcid )
>> + switch ( ACCESS_ONCE(opt_pcid) )
>> + {
>> + case PCID_OFF:
>> + case PCID_XPTI:
>> + d->arch.pv.pcid = false;
>> + break;
>> +
>> + case PCID_ALL:
>> + case PCID_NOXPTI:
>> + d->arch.pv.pcid = true;
>> + break;
>> +
>> + default:
>> + ASSERT_UNREACHABLE();
>> + break;
>> + }
>
> This chunk is (functionality wise) exactly the same as the one in
> pv_domain_initialise, it might be good to put this in a separate
> helper?
Could be, indeed, but would at least double the size of this patch.
I wasn't convinced that's worth it. I'll see what Andrew thinks,
since I'll need his ack anyway (at least in my understanding of the
still un-refined, un-written rules of what is necessary for
committing a maintainer's patch).
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-12 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-11 15:15 [Xen-devel] [PATCH RESEND/PING 0/9] XSA-292 follow-up Jan Beulich
2019-09-11 15:21 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/9] x86: adjust cr3_pcid() return type Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 9:19 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-11 15:22 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/9] x86: limit the amount of TLB flushing in switch_cr3_cr4() Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 9:54 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-12 10:11 ` Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 10:38 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-11 15:22 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/9] x86/mm: honor opt_pcid also for 32-bit PV domains Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 10:34 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-12 10:45 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2019-09-11 15:23 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/9] x86/HVM: move NOFLUSH handling out of hvm_set_cr3() Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 11:35 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-12 11:52 ` Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 14:44 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-12 14:47 ` Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 15:42 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-12 15:52 ` Jan Beulich
2019-09-11 15:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/9] x86/HVM: refuse CR3 loads with reserved (upper) bits set Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 11:45 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-12 12:01 ` Jan Beulich
2019-09-11 15:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 6/9] x86/HVM: relax shadow mode check in hvm_set_cr3() Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 14:50 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-11 15:25 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 7/9] x86/HVM: cosmetics to hvm_set_cr3() Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 15:04 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-11 15:26 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 8/9] x86/CPUID: drop INVPCID dependency on PCID Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 15:11 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-11 15:26 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 9/9] x86: PCID is unused when !PV Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 15:31 ` Roger Pau Monné
2019-09-12 15:46 ` Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 15:48 ` Jan Beulich
2019-09-12 15:57 ` Roger Pau Monné
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-05-02 11:35 [PATCH 0/9] XSA-292 follow-up Jan Beulich
2019-05-02 12:19 ` [PATCH 3/9] x86/mm: honor opt_pcid also for 32-bit PV domains Jan Beulich
2019-05-02 12:19 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
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=56a7bf8f-74b6-7d69-f6e5-30644e677869@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).