From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: dave@gnu.org
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: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:05:40 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50485954.50204@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1346882061.6304.17.camel@offbook>
On 09/06/2012 12:54 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> 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.
That's not very interesting. In all real machines, if you have VPID you
also have EPT. Intel are unlikely to produce a processor without 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).
The results are impressive, but lack real-world relevance.
Individual-address invalidation isn't very useful with EPT, since we let
the guest issue INVLPG itself and otherwise don't bother with guest page
tables.
Individual-address INVEPT would probably be more useful, but there is no
such instruction variant.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-06 8:05 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
2012-09-06 8:05 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
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=50485954.50204@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=dave@gnu.org \
--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.