From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
To: Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@samsung.com>
Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm/arm64: Optimize away redundant LR tracking
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 23:42:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151022214259.GC25602@cbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <34d659eff6cda85488561ccd2382b82377b44784.1443796321.git.p.fedin@samsung.com>
On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 05:44:28PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Currently we use vgic_irq_lr_map in order to track which LRs hold which
> IRQs, and lr_used bitmap in order to track which LRs are used or free.
>
> vgic_irq_lr_map is actually used only for piggy-back optimization, and
> can be easily replaced by iteration over lr_used. This is good because in
> future, when LPI support is introduced, number of IRQs will grow up to at
> least 16384, while numbers from 1024 to 8192 are never going to be used.
> This would be a huge memory waste.
>
> In its turn, lr_used is also completely redundant since
> ae705930fca6322600690df9dc1c7d0516145a93 ("arm/arm64: KVM: Keep elrsr/aisr
> in sync with software model"), because together with lr_used we also update
> elrsr. This allows to easily replace lr_used with elrsr, inverting all
> conditions (because in elrsr '1' means 'free').
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@samsung.com>
> ---
> include/kvm/arm_vgic.h | 6 ----
> virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------
> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
> index 4e14dac..d908028 100644
> --- a/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
> +++ b/include/kvm/arm_vgic.h
> @@ -296,9 +296,6 @@ struct vgic_v3_cpu_if {
> };
>
> struct vgic_cpu {
> - /* per IRQ to LR mapping */
> - u8 *vgic_irq_lr_map;
> -
> /* Pending/active/both interrupts on this VCPU */
> DECLARE_BITMAP( pending_percpu, VGIC_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS);
> DECLARE_BITMAP( active_percpu, VGIC_NR_PRIVATE_IRQS);
> @@ -309,9 +306,6 @@ struct vgic_cpu {
> unsigned long *active_shared;
> unsigned long *pend_act_shared;
>
> - /* Bitmap of used/free list registers */
> - DECLARE_BITMAP( lr_used, VGIC_V2_MAX_LRS);
> -
> /* Number of list registers on this CPU */
> int nr_lr;
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> index 6bd1c9b..2f4d25a 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> @@ -102,9 +102,10 @@
> #include "vgic.h"
>
> static void vgic_retire_disabled_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> -static void vgic_retire_lr(int lr_nr, int irq, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> +static void vgic_retire_lr(int lr_nr, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> static struct vgic_lr vgic_get_lr(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int lr);
> static void vgic_set_lr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int lr, struct vgic_lr lr_desc);
> +static u64 vgic_get_elrsr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> static struct irq_phys_map *vgic_irq_map_search(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> int virt_irq);
>
> @@ -683,9 +684,11 @@ bool vgic_handle_cfg_reg(u32 *reg, struct kvm_exit_mmio *mmio,
> void vgic_unqueue_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
> + u64 elrsr = vgic_get_elrsr(vcpu);
> + unsigned long *elrsr_ptr = u64_to_bitmask(&elrsr);
> int i;
>
> - for_each_set_bit(i, vgic_cpu->lr_used, vgic_cpu->nr_lr) {
> + for_each_clear_bit(i, elrsr_ptr, vgic_cpu->nr_lr) {
> struct vgic_lr lr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, i);
>
> /*
> @@ -728,7 +731,7 @@ void vgic_unqueue_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> * Mark the LR as free for other use.
> */
> BUG_ON(lr.state & LR_STATE_MASK);
> - vgic_retire_lr(i, lr.irq, vcpu);
> + vgic_retire_lr(i, vcpu);
> vgic_irq_clear_queued(vcpu, lr.irq);
>
> /* Finally update the VGIC state. */
> @@ -1087,15 +1090,12 @@ static inline void vgic_enable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> vgic_ops->enable(vcpu);
> }
>
> -static void vgic_retire_lr(int lr_nr, int irq, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +static void vgic_retire_lr(int lr_nr, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> - struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
> struct vgic_lr vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr_nr);
>
> vlr.state = 0;
> vgic_set_lr(vcpu, lr_nr, vlr);
> - clear_bit(lr_nr, vgic_cpu->lr_used);
> - vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[irq] = LR_EMPTY;
> vgic_sync_lr_elrsr(vcpu, lr_nr, vlr);
> }
>
> @@ -1110,14 +1110,15 @@ static void vgic_retire_lr(int lr_nr, int irq, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> */
> static void vgic_retire_disabled_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> - struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
> + u64 elrsr = vgic_get_elrsr(vcpu);
> + unsigned long *elrsr_ptr = u64_to_bitmask(&elrsr);
> int lr;
>
> - for_each_set_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used, vgic->nr_lr) {
> + for_each_clear_bit(lr, elrsr_ptr, vgic->nr_lr) {
> struct vgic_lr vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr);
>
> if (!vgic_irq_is_enabled(vcpu, vlr.irq)) {
> - vgic_retire_lr(lr, vlr.irq, vcpu);
> + vgic_retire_lr(lr, vcpu);
> if (vgic_irq_is_queued(vcpu, vlr.irq))
> vgic_irq_clear_queued(vcpu, vlr.irq);
> }
> @@ -1169,8 +1170,9 @@ static void vgic_queue_irq_to_lr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int irq,
> */
> bool vgic_queue_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u8 sgi_source_id, int irq)
> {
> - struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
> struct vgic_dist *dist = &vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic;
> + u64 elrsr = vgic_get_elrsr(vcpu);
> + unsigned long *elrsr_ptr = u64_to_bitmask(&elrsr);
> struct vgic_lr vlr;
> int lr;
>
> @@ -1181,28 +1183,22 @@ bool vgic_queue_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u8 sgi_source_id, int irq)
>
> kvm_debug("Queue IRQ%d\n", irq);
>
> - lr = vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[irq];
> -
> /* Do we have an active interrupt for the same CPUID? */
> - if (lr != LR_EMPTY) {
> + for_each_clear_bit(lr, elrsr_ptr, vgic->nr_lr) {
> vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr);
> - if (vlr.source == sgi_source_id) {
> + if (vlr.irq == irq && vlr.source == sgi_source_id) {
> kvm_debug("LR%d piggyback for IRQ%d\n", lr, vlr.irq);
> - BUG_ON(!test_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used));
> vgic_queue_irq_to_lr(vcpu, irq, lr, vlr);
> return true;
> }
> }
>
> /* Try to use another LR for this interrupt */
> - lr = find_first_zero_bit((unsigned long *)vgic_cpu->lr_used,
> - vgic->nr_lr);
> + lr = find_first_bit(elrsr_ptr, vgic->nr_lr);
> if (lr >= vgic->nr_lr)
> return false;
>
> kvm_debug("LR%d allocated for IRQ%d %x\n", lr, irq, sgi_source_id);
> - vgic_cpu->vgic_irq_lr_map[irq] = lr;
> - set_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used);
>
> vlr.irq = irq;
> vlr.source = sgi_source_id;
> @@ -1243,6 +1239,8 @@ static void __kvm_vgic_flush_hwstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> int i, vcpu_id, lr, ret;
> int overflow = 0;
> int nr_shared = vgic_nr_shared_irqs(dist);
> + u64 elrsr;
> + unsigned long *elrsr_ptr;
>
> vcpu_id = vcpu->vcpu_id;
>
> @@ -1296,13 +1294,11 @@ epilog:
> clear_bit(vcpu_id, dist->irq_pending_on_cpu);
> }
>
> - for (lr = 0; lr < vgic->nr_lr; lr++) {
> - struct vgic_lr vlr;
> -
> - if (!test_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used))
> - continue;
> + elrsr = vgic_get_elrsr(vcpu);
> + elrsr_ptr = u64_to_bitmask(&elrsr);
>
> - vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr);
> + for_each_clear_bit(lr, elrsr_ptr, vgic->nr_lr) {
> + struct vgic_lr vlr = vgic_get_lr(vcpu, lr);
>
> /*
> * If we have a mapping, and the virtual interrupt is
> @@ -1443,7 +1439,6 @@ static int vgic_sync_hwirq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct vgic_lr vlr)
> /* Sync back the VGIC state after a guest run */
> static void __kvm_vgic_sync_hwstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> - struct vgic_cpu *vgic_cpu = &vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu;
> struct vgic_dist *dist = &vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic;
> u64 elrsr;
> unsigned long *elrsr_ptr;
> @@ -1456,12 +1451,8 @@ static void __kvm_vgic_sync_hwstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>
> /* Deal with HW interrupts, and clear mappings for empty LRs */
> for (lr = 0; lr < vgic->nr_lr; lr++) {
> - struct vgic_lr vlr;
> -
> - if (!test_bit(lr, vgic_cpu->lr_used))
> - continue;
Is there not at least a theoretical change in functionality here?
After this patch, we would consider all LRs, not just those we knew were
set when we entered the VM.
Do we have a guarantee that anything we consider in vgic_sync_hwirq at
this point have had lr_used set?
Thanks,
-Christoffer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-22 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-02 14:44 [PATCH 0/2] KVM: arm/arm64: Clean up some obsolete code Pavel Fedin
2015-10-02 14:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm/arm64: Optimize away redundant LR tracking Pavel Fedin
2015-10-12 16:56 ` Andre Przywara
2015-10-13 15:41 ` Christoffer Dall
2015-10-22 21:42 ` Christoffer Dall [this message]
2015-10-23 7:12 ` Pavel Fedin
2015-10-02 14:44 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm/arm64: Merge vgic_set_lr() and vgic_sync_lr_elrsr() Pavel Fedin
2015-10-22 21:54 ` Christoffer Dall
2015-10-08 10:14 ` [PATCH 0/2] KVM: arm/arm64: Clean up some obsolete code Christoffer Dall
2015-10-08 10:55 ` Pavel Fedin
2015-10-08 10:56 ` Marc Zyngier
2015-10-08 11:15 ` Andre Przywara
2015-10-08 12:04 ` Pavel Fedin
2015-10-08 12:33 ` Christoffer Dall
2015-10-08 11:36 ` Pavel Fedin
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=20151022214259.GC25602@cbox \
--to=christoffer.dall@linaro.org \
--cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=p.fedin@samsung.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 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).