From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@gnu.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: invalidate vpid for invlpg instruction
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 23:54:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1346882061.6304.17.camel@offbook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50447442.2050307@redhat.com>
On Mon, 2012-09-03 at 12:11 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/03/2012 02:27 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-08-31 at 14:37 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 06:10:48PM +0200, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >> > For processors that support VPIDs we should invalidate the page table entry
> >> > specified by the lineal address. For this purpose add support for individual
> >> > address invalidations.
> >>
> >> Not necessary - a single context invalidation is performed through
> >> KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH.
> >
> > Since vpid_sync_context() supports both single and all-context vpid
> > invalidations, wouldn't it make sense to also add individual address
> > ones as well, supporting further granularity?
>
> It might. Do you have benchmarks supporting this?
>
I ran two benchmarks: Java Dacapo[1] Sunflow (renders a set of images
using ray tracing) and a vanilla 3.2 kernel build (with 1 job and -j8).
The host configuration is an Intel i7-2635QM (4 cores + HT) with 4Gb RAM
running Linus's latest and only running standard system daemons. For KVM
I disabled EPT.
The guest configuration is a 64bit 4 core 4Gb RAM, running Linux 3.2
(debian) and only running the benchmark.
All results represent the mean of 5 runs, with time(1).
Dacapo without individual addr invvpid:
real 1m25.406s
user 4m59.315s
sys 1m25.406s
Dacapo with individual addr invvpid:
real 1m4.421s
user 3m47.150s
sys 0m1.592s
--
vanilla kernel build without individual addr invvpid:
real 16m42.571s
user 13m28.975s
sys 2m54.487s
vanilla kernel build with individual addr invvpid:
real 15m45.789s
user 12m25.691s
sys 2m44.806s
--
vanilla kernel build (-j8) without individual addr invvpid:
real 10m32.276s
user 33m47.687s
sys 5m37.725s
vanilla kernel build (-j8) with individual addr invvpid:
real 8m29.789s
user 28m12.850s
sys 4m34.353s
In all cases using individual address invalidation outperforms single
context ones regarding wall time. Comments?
[1] http://dacapobench.org/
Thanks,
Davidlohr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-05 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-31 16:10 [PATCH] KVM: VMX: invalidate vpid for invlpg instruction Davidlohr Bueso
2012-08-31 17:37 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-09-02 23:27 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2012-09-03 9:11 ` Avi Kivity
2012-09-05 21:54 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2012-09-06 8:05 ` Avi Kivity
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=1346882061.6304.17.camel@offbook \
--to=dave@gnu.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@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 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.