From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce get_set_regs_perf test
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2022 09:42:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3878ff49741733d6dd76aae57b594cb2@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAeT=FxbbBq0sxUZAOSJW_wM+6M=xQe-p+=aeqpg=-y9VbpnnA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Reiji,
On 2022-02-19 04:50, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:12 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 04:52:10 +0000,
>> Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Would it make sense to test some opt-in capabilities that expose
>> > additional registers (PMU, SVE, etc.)?
>>
>> I think this is important. System registers are usually saved/restored
>
> Yes, I will fix the test to include registers for opt-in features
> when supported.
>
>> in groups, and due to the way we walk the sysreg array, timings are
>> unlikely to be uniform. Getting a grip on that could help restructure
>> the walking if required (either per-group arrays, or maybe a tree
>> structure).
>
> The biggest system register table that I know is sys_reg_descs[],
> and KVM_SET_ONE_REG/KVM_GET_ONE_REG/emulation code already uses
> binary search to find the target entry. So, the search itself
> isn't that bad. The difference between the min and the max
> latency of KVM_GET_ONE_REG for the registers is always around
> 200nsec on Ampere Altra machine as far as I checked.
Even if it is OK so far, it is bound to get worse over time, as
the architecture keeps adding all sort of things that we'll
eventually have to save/restore.
I see this test as a way to monitor this trend and work out when
we need to invest in something better.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
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: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Anata <rananta@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce get_set_regs_perf test
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2022 09:42:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3878ff49741733d6dd76aae57b594cb2@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAeT=FxbbBq0sxUZAOSJW_wM+6M=xQe-p+=aeqpg=-y9VbpnnA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Reiji,
On 2022-02-19 04:50, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:12 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 04:52:10 +0000,
>> Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Would it make sense to test some opt-in capabilities that expose
>> > additional registers (PMU, SVE, etc.)?
>>
>> I think this is important. System registers are usually saved/restored
>
> Yes, I will fix the test to include registers for opt-in features
> when supported.
>
>> in groups, and due to the way we walk the sysreg array, timings are
>> unlikely to be uniform. Getting a grip on that could help restructure
>> the walking if required (either per-group arrays, or maybe a tree
>> structure).
>
> The biggest system register table that I know is sys_reg_descs[],
> and KVM_SET_ONE_REG/KVM_GET_ONE_REG/emulation code already uses
> binary search to find the target entry. So, the search itself
> isn't that bad. The difference between the min and the max
> latency of KVM_GET_ONE_REG for the registers is always around
> 200nsec on Ampere Altra machine as far as I checked.
Even if it is OK so far, it is bound to get worse over time, as
the architecture keeps adding all sort of things that we'll
eventually have to save/restore.
I see this test as a way to monitor this trend and work out when
we need to invest in something better.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
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: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@google.com>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@google.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Anata <rananta@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce get_set_regs_perf test
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2022 09:42:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3878ff49741733d6dd76aae57b594cb2@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAeT=FxbbBq0sxUZAOSJW_wM+6M=xQe-p+=aeqpg=-y9VbpnnA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Reiji,
On 2022-02-19 04:50, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:12 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 04:52:10 +0000,
>> Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Would it make sense to test some opt-in capabilities that expose
>> > additional registers (PMU, SVE, etc.)?
>>
>> I think this is important. System registers are usually saved/restored
>
> Yes, I will fix the test to include registers for opt-in features
> when supported.
>
>> in groups, and due to the way we walk the sysreg array, timings are
>> unlikely to be uniform. Getting a grip on that could help restructure
>> the walking if required (either per-group arrays, or maybe a tree
>> structure).
>
> The biggest system register table that I know is sys_reg_descs[],
> and KVM_SET_ONE_REG/KVM_GET_ONE_REG/emulation code already uses
> binary search to find the target entry. So, the search itself
> isn't that bad. The difference between the min and the max
> latency of KVM_GET_ONE_REG for the registers is always around
> 200nsec on Ampere Altra machine as far as I checked.
Even if it is OK so far, it is bound to get worse over time, as
the architecture keeps adding all sort of things that we'll
eventually have to save/restore.
I see this test as a way to monitor this trend and work out when
we need to invest in something better.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-19 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-17 3:49 [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: kvm_vm_elf_load() and elfhdr_get() should close fd Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-17 3:49 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-17 3:49 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-17 3:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: selftests: Introduce get_set_regs_perf test Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-17 3:49 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-17 3:49 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-17 4:52 ` Oliver Upton
2022-02-17 4:52 ` Oliver Upton
2022-02-17 4:52 ` Oliver Upton
2022-02-17 9:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-17 9:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-17 9:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-19 4:50 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-19 4:50 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-19 4:50 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-19 9:42 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2022-02-19 9:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-19 9:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-19 3:53 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-19 3:53 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-19 3:53 ` Reiji Watanabe
2022-02-17 3:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: kvm_vm_elf_load() and elfhdr_get() should close fd Oliver Upton
2022-02-17 3:55 ` Oliver Upton
2022-02-17 3:55 ` Oliver Upton
2022-06-16 14:07 ` Andrew Jones
2022-06-16 14:07 ` Andrew Jones
2022-06-16 14:07 ` Andrew Jones
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=3878ff49741733d6dd76aae57b594cb2@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pshier@google.com \
--cc=reijiw@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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 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.