From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Vitaly Kuznetsov" <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<x86@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kas@kernel.org>,
"Xin Li (Intel)" <xin@zytor.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
"Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@linutronix.de>,
"open list:KVM PARAVIRT (KVM/paravirt)" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] kvm: x86: implement PV send_IPI method
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 20:19:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aHo7vRrul0aQqrpK@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACGkMEvNaKgF7bOPUahaYMi6n2vijAXwFvAhQ22LecZGSC-_bg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 07:15:37PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 7:01 PM Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 03:52:30PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> >On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 2:25 PM Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>> >>
>> >> We used to have PV version of send_IPI_mask and
>> >> send_IPI_mask_allbutself. This patch implements PV send_IPI method to
>> >> reduce the number of vmexits.
>>
>> It won't reduce the number of VM-exits; in fact, it may increase them on CPUs
>> that support IPI virtualization.
>
>Sure, but I wonder if it reduces the vmexits when there's no APICV or
>L2 VM. I thought it can reduce the 2 vmexits to 1?
Even without APICv, there is just 1 vmexit due to APIC write (xAPIC mode)
or MSR write (x2APIC mode).
>
>>
>> With IPI virtualization enabled, *unicast* and physical-addressing IPIs won't
>> cause a VM-exit.
>
>Right.
>
>> Instead, the microcode posts interrupts directly to the target
>> vCPU. The PV version always causes a VM-exit.
>
>Yes, but it applies to all PV IPI I think.
For multi-cast IPIs, a single hypercall (PV IPI) outperforms multiple ICR
writes, even when IPI virtualization is enabled.
>
>>
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>> >> Tested-by: Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com>
>> >
>> >I think a question here is are we able to see performance improvement
>> >in any kind of setup?
>>
>> It may result in a negative performance impact.
>
>Userspace can check and enable PV IPI for the case where it suits.
Yeah, we need to identify the cases. One example may be for TDX guests, using
a PV approach (TDVMCALL) can avoid the #VE cost.
>
>For example, HyperV did something like:
>
>void __init hv_apic_init(void)
>{
> if (ms_hyperv.hints & HV_X64_CLUSTER_IPI_RECOMMENDED) {
> pr_info("Hyper-V: Using IPI hypercalls\n");
> /*
> * Set the IPI entry points.
> */
> orig_apic = *apic;
>
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI, hv_send_ipi);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_mask, hv_send_ipi_mask);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_mask_allbutself,
>hv_send_ipi_mask_allbutself);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_allbutself,
>hv_send_ipi_allbutself);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_all, hv_send_ipi_all);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_self, hv_send_ipi_self);
>}
>
>send_IPI_mask is there.
>
>Thanks
>
>>
>> >
>> >Thanks
>> >
>> >
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-18 12:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-18 6:24 [PATCH v1] kvm: x86: implement PV send_IPI method Cindy Lu
2025-07-18 7:52 ` Jason Wang
2025-07-18 11:00 ` Chao Gao
2025-07-18 11:15 ` Jason Wang
2025-07-18 12:19 ` Chao Gao [this message]
2025-07-18 14:01 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-18 15:15 ` Chao Gao
2025-07-18 15:22 ` Sean Christopherson
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=aHo7vRrul0aQqrpK@intel.com \
--to=chao.gao@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=darwi@linutronix.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lulu@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xin@zytor.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.