[RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that 
dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the 
ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses 
by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at 
runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.

The upshot of all that is that 
http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer 
required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy 
from my very limited testing.

Please download the test release from 
http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.  
Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.

Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Haydn Solomon]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1945 bytes --]

On compilation I get the following error.

../qemu-kvm.h:41: error: redefinition of 'kvm_log_tpr'
../qemu-kvm.h:41: error: previous definition of 'kvm_log_tpr' was here
make[2]: *** [i8259.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory
`/root/Download/software/tpr-opt-1/qemu/x86_64-softmmu'
make[1]: *** [subdir-x86_64-softmmu] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/root/Download/software/tpr-opt-1/qemu'
make: *** [qemu] Error 2

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

Haydn

On 10/25/07, Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that
> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the
> ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses
> by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at
> runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.
>
> The upshot of all that is that
> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer
> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy
> from my very limited testing.
>
> Please download the test release from
> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.
> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>
> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>
> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> kvm-devel mailing list
> kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2700 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Haydn Solomon wrote:
> On compilation I get the following error.
>
> ../qemu-kvm.h:41: error: redefinition of 'kvm_log_tpr'
> ../qemu-kvm.h:41: error: previous definition of 'kvm_log_tpr' was here
> make[2]: *** [i8259.o] Error 1
> make[2]: Leaving directory 
> `/root/Download/software/tpr-opt-1/qemu/x86_64-softmmu'
> make[1]: *** [subdir-x86_64-softmmu] Error 2
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/root/Download/software/tpr-opt-1/qemu'
> make: *** [qemu] Error 2
>
> Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

I uploaded a new version that fixes this.  Same location.


Now back to reviewing and applying patches.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Haydn Solomon]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 819 bytes --]

Thanks, that was quick.

On 10/25/07, Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Haydn Solomon wrote:
> > On compilation I get the following error.
> >
> > ../qemu-kvm.h:41: error: redefinition of 'kvm_log_tpr'
> > ../qemu-kvm.h:41: error: previous definition of 'kvm_log_tpr' was here
> > make[2]: *** [i8259.o] Error 1
> > make[2]: Leaving directory
> > `/root/Download/software/tpr-opt-1/qemu/x86_64-softmmu'
> > make[1]: *** [subdir-x86_64-softmmu] Error 2
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/root/Download/software/tpr-opt-1/qemu'
> > make: *** [qemu] Error 2
> >
> > Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
>
> I uploaded a new version that fixes this.  Same location.
>
>
> Now back to reviewing and applying patches.
>
> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
>
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1216 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Jindrich Makovicka]

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:39:33 -0400
"Haydn Solomon" <haydn.solomon-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Thanks, that was quick.

Finally, this (pre)release solved the long standing Java IE Plugin
lockup problem for me. Thanks a lot!

-- 
Jindrich Makovicka

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Jindrich Makovicka wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:39:33 -0400
> "Haydn Solomon" <haydn.solomon-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>   
>> Thanks, that was quick.
>>     
>
> Finally, this (pre)release solved the long standing Java IE Plugin
> lockup problem for me. Thanks a lot!
>
>   

No, this release is meant to cause problems, not fix them.

(but thanks for the reminder)

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Haydn Solomon]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1529 bytes --]

I also had a problem installing windows xp. Got the following error

localhost kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------
Message from syslogd@ at Thu Oct 25 13:59:27 2007 ...
localhost kernel: invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP


Installed windows xp with the following options

/usr/local/kvm/bin/qemu-system-x86_64 \
-hda windowsxp.img \
-m 400 \
-localtime \
-smp 2 \
-boot d \
-cdrom /home/hsolomon/isos/en_winxp_pro_with_sp2.iso &

Haydn



On 10/25/07, Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Jindrich Makovicka wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:39:33 -0400
> > "Haydn Solomon" <haydn.solomon-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Thanks, that was quick.
> >>
> >
> > Finally, this (pre)release solved the long standing Java IE Plugin
> > lockup problem for me. Thanks a lot!
> >
> >
>
> No, this release is meant to cause problems, not fix them.
>
> (but thanks for the reminder)
>
> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> kvm-devel mailing list
> kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2262 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Haydn Solomon wrote:
> I also had a problem installing windows xp. Got the following error


I guess I'll have to test that too.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Haydn Solomon wrote:
>   
>> I also had a problem installing windows xp. Got the following error
>>     
>
>
> I guess I'll have to test that too.
>   

I hit it again, this time about half-way through the second stage 
install of Windows XP (last time it was almost immediately).  This is 
with your updated tree.  I'll next try to reproduce with the latest git.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori


[ 1577.621100] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 1577.621106] kernel BUG at /home/anthony/tmp/2/tpr-opt-1/kernel/mmu.c:308!
[ 1577.621108] invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
[ 1577.621111] CPU 1
[ 1577.621113] Modules linked in: tun kvm_intel kvm i915 drm af_packet 
rfcomm l2cap thinkpad_acpi ppdev acpi_cpufreq cpufreq_stats 
cpufreq_ondemand freq_table cpufreq_userspace cpufreq_conservative 
cpufreq_powersave sbs ac battery bay dock container button video ipv6 
bridge ipt_REJECT xt_state xt_tcpudp iptable_filter ipt_MASQUERADE 
iptable_nat nf_nat nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_conntrack nfnetlink ip_tables 
x_tables sbp2 lp arc4 ecb blkcipher snd_hda_intel snd_pcm_oss 
snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm snd_seq_dummy iwl4965 iwlwifi_mac80211 snd_seq_oss 
parport_pc snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi parport cfg80211 pcmcia hci_usb 
bluetooth snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq snd_timer snd_seq_device intel_agp 
sdhci mmc_core serio_raw psmouse pcspkr yenta_socket rsrc_nonstatic 
pcmcia_core snd soundcore shpchp pci_hotplug snd_page_alloc joydev evdev 
ext3 jbd mbcache usbhid hid sg sr_mod sd_mod cdrom ata_piix ehci_hcd 
ohci1394 ieee1394 ata_generic libata scsi_mod uhci_hcd usbcore e1000 
thermal processor fan fuse apparmor commoncap
[ 1577.621172] Pid: 7788, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 
2.6.22-14-generic #1
[ 1577.621175] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8837d905>]  [<ffffffff8837d905>] 
:kvm:mmu_memory_cache_alloc+0x25/0x30
[ 1577.621188] RSP: 0018:ffff8100441819b8  EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 1577.621190] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffc200010c1968 RCX: 
ffff81001eebc080
[ 1577.621193] RDX: ffff81001eebc088 RSI: 0000000000000028 RDI: 
ffff8100388543e0
[ 1577.621195] RBP: ffff81000377f060 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 
0000000000000004
[ 1577.621197] R10: 00000000081ed163 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 
ffff810038854000
[ 1577.621200] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff81000377f060 R15: 
ffff810038854000
[ 1577.621202] FS:  00002b7827310d40(0000) GS:ffff81000102c280(0000) 
knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 1577.621205] CS:  0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 000000008005003b
[ 1577.621207] CR2: 0000000001002ff8 CR3: 0000000054f45000 CR4: 
00000000000026e0
[ 1577.621210] Process qemu-system-x86 (pid: 7788, threadinfo 
ffff810044180000, task ffff81000d4d8dc0)
[ 1577.621212] Stack:  ffffc200010c1968 ffffffff8837da16 
00000000441c6043 0000000000000002
[ 1577.621216]  00000000441c6000 ffffffff8837e1ad 00002b7828552000 
00000000000081ed
[ 1577.621220]  0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000000081ed000 
00000000081ed000
[ 1577.621223] Call Trace:
[ 1577.621233]  [<ffffffff8837da16>] :kvm:rmap_add+0xf6/0x110
[ 1577.621243]  [<ffffffff8837e1ad>] 
:kvm:paging32_set_pte_common+0x10d/0x2b0
[ 1577.621258]  [<ffffffff8837e399>] :kvm:paging32_set_pte+0x49/0x50
[ 1577.621269]  [<ffffffff8837e9dd>] :kvm:kvm_mmu_pte_write+0x33d/0x3b0
[ 1577.621287]  [<ffffffff883786cd>] 
:kvm:emulator_write_emulated_onepage+0x9d/0x100
[ 1577.621298]  [<ffffffff88380da8>] :kvm:x86_emulate_insn+0x5e8/0x4450
[ 1577.621308]  [<ffffffff88396467>] :kvm_intel:vmcs_readl+0x17/0x20
[ 1577.621320]  [<ffffffff88378cff>] :kvm:emulate_instruction+0x1af/0x2f0
[ 1577.621328]  [<ffffffff88399090>] :kvm_intel:handle_exception+0x240/0x2b0
[ 1577.621336]  [<ffffffff88385ab9>] :kvm:apic_update_ppr+0x29/0x60
[ 1577.621347]  [<ffffffff8837aa74>] :kvm:kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0xe54/0x11b0
[ 1577.621355]  [<ffffffff8026e000>] file_read_actor+0x0/0x150
[ 1577.621366]  [<ffffffff8022cacc>] task_rq_lock+0x4c/0x90
[ 1577.621372]  [<ffffffff8022f30c>] try_to_wake_up+0x5c/0x3f0
[ 1577.621385]  [<ffffffff802a84f5>] core_sys_select+0x275/0x300
[ 1577.621391]  [<ffffffff8022ca03>] __wake_up+0x43/0x70
[ 1577.621402]  [<ffffffff80240719>] __dequeue_signal+0x19/0x1d0
[ 1577.621409]  [<ffffffff8023ffce>] recalc_sigpending+0xe/0x30
[ 1577.621412]  [<ffffffff8024212c>] dequeue_signal+0x5c/0x190
[ 1577.621416]  [<ffffffff8024f4f9>] getnstimeofday+0x39/0xa0
[ 1577.621423]  [<ffffffff802a6e05>] do_ioctl+0x35/0xe0
[ 1577.621428]  [<ffffffff802a6f24>] vfs_ioctl+0x74/0x2d0
[ 1577.621435]  [<ffffffff802a7215>] sys_ioctl+0x95/0xb0
[ 1577.621442]  [<ffffffff80209e8e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[ 1577.621452]
[ 1577.621453]
[ 1577.621454] Code: 0f 0b eb fe 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 48 81 c7 e0 03 00 
00 be 28
[ 1577.621462] RIP  [<ffffffff8837d905>] 
:kvm:mmu_memory_cache_alloc+0x25/0x30
[ 1577.621471]  RSP <ffff8100441819b8>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Haydn Solomon wrote:
>>  
>>> I also had a problem installing windows xp. Got the following error
>>>     
>>
>>
>> I guess I'll have to test that too.
>>   
>
> I hit it again, this time about half-way through the second stage 
> install of Windows XP (last time it was almost immediately).  This is 
> with your updated tree.  I'll next try to reproduce with the latest git.

Can you try upping the 'min' parameter below:

> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
>     int r;
>
>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
>     if (r)
>         goto out;
>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
>     if (r)
>         goto out;
>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
>     if (r)
>         goto out;
>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
> out:
>     return r;
> }


These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to 
mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> Haydn Solomon wrote:
>>>  
>>>> I also had a problem installing windows xp. Got the following error
>>>>     
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess I'll have to test that too.
>>>   
>>
>> I hit it again, this time about half-way through the second stage 
>> install of Windows XP (last time it was almost immediately).  This is 
>> with your updated tree.  I'll next try to reproduce with the latest git.
>
> Can you try upping the 'min' parameter below:
>
>> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>>     int r;
>>
>>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
>>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
>>     if (r)
>>         goto out;
>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
>>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
>>     if (r)
>>         goto out;
>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
>>     if (r)
>>         goto out;
>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
>>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
>> out:
>>     return r;
>> }
>
>
> These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to 
> mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.

Sure.  Would this be affected at all by your tpr patch?  IIUC, if this 
is the problem, it should be reproducible with the latest git too?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>
>>> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> {
>>>     int r;
>>>
>>>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
>>>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
>>>     if (r)
>>>         goto out;
>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
>>>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
>>>     if (r)
>>>         goto out;
>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
>>>     if (r)
>>>         goto out;
>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
>>>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
>>> out:
>>>     return r;
>>> }
>>
>>
>> These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to 
>> mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.
>
> Sure.  Would this be affected at all by your tpr patch?  

I believe not, but the code doesn't care what I believe.

> IIUC, if this is the problem, it should be reproducible with the 
> latest git too?

One difference is that the tpr patch disables nx.  That causes Windows 
to go into 32-bit paging mode (nice that it has both pae and nonpae in 
the same kernel), which may change things.

You can try booting your host with nx disabled to get the same effect 
(or disable nx cpuid in kvm).

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Haydn Solomon]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1806 bytes --]

I was able to complete an installation of windows xp using -smp 1. However,
I would like to test on an existing virtual machine with applications
already installed on it. Changing the HAL to ACPI should be enough for me to
test the windows optimization right feature right?

On 10/25/07, Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>
> >>> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >>> {
> >>>     int r;
> >>>
> >>>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
> >>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
> >>>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
> >>>     if (r)
> >>>         goto out;
> >>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
> >>>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
> >>>     if (r)
> >>>         goto out;
> >>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
> >>>     if (r)
> >>>         goto out;
> >>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
> >>>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
> >>> out:
> >>>     return r;
> >>> }
> >>
> >>
> >> These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to
> >> mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.
> >
> > Sure.  Would this be affected at all by your tpr patch?
>
> I believe not, but the code doesn't care what I believe.
>
> > IIUC, if this is the problem, it should be reproducible with the
> > latest git too?
>
> One difference is that the tpr patch disables nx.  That causes Windows
> to go into 32-bit paging mode (nice that it has both pae and nonpae in
> the same kernel), which may change things.
>
> You can try booting your host with nx disabled to get the same effect
> (or disable nx cpuid in kvm).
>
> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
>
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3074 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Haydn Solomon wrote:
> I was able to complete an installation of windows xp using -smp 1. 
> However, I would like to test on an existing virtual machine with 
> applications already installed on it. Changing the HAL to ACPI should 
> be enough for me to test the windows optimization right feature right?
>

Yes.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>
>>>> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>> {
>>>>     int r;
>>>>
>>>>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
>>>>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
>>>>     if (r)
>>>>         goto out;
>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
>>>>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
>>>>     if (r)
>>>>         goto out;
>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
>>>>     if (r)
>>>>         goto out;
>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
>>>>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
>>>> out:
>>>>     return r;
>>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to 
>>> mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.
>>
>> Sure.  Would this be affected at all by your tpr patch?  
>
> I believe not, but the code doesn't care what I believe.
>
>> IIUC, if this is the problem, it should be reproducible with the 
>> latest git too?
>
> One difference is that the tpr patch disables nx.  That causes Windows 
> to go into 32-bit paging mode (nice that it has both pae and nonpae in 
> the same kernel), which may change things.
>
> You can try booting your host with nx disabled to get the same effect 
> (or disable nx cpuid in kvm).

I've disabled NX in KVM and that didn't reproduce the issue in the 
current git.

If I double all of the memory caches, I can't seem to reproduce.  
However, as soon as I reduce rmap_desc_cache down to 1, I can reproduce.

I'll try to see if just setting the rmap_desc_cache line to 2 is enough 
to make the problem go away.

How can the guest provoke this BUG() based on the cache size?  Should 
the cache size only affect performance?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>     
>>>>> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>>> {
>>>>>     int r;
>>>>>
>>>>>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
>>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
>>>>>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
>>>>>     if (r)
>>>>>         goto out;
>>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
>>>>>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
>>>>>     if (r)
>>>>>         goto out;
>>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
>>>>>     if (r)
>>>>>         goto out;
>>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
>>>>>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
>>>>> out:
>>>>>     return r;
>>>>> }
>>>>>           
>>>> These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to 
>>>> mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.
>>>>         
>>> Sure.  Would this be affected at all by your tpr patch?  
>>>       
>> I believe not, but the code doesn't care what I believe.
>>
>>     
>>> IIUC, if this is the problem, it should be reproducible with the 
>>> latest git too?
>>>       
>> One difference is that the tpr patch disables nx.  That causes Windows 
>> to go into 32-bit paging mode (nice that it has both pae and nonpae in 
>> the same kernel), which may change things.
>>
>> You can try booting your host with nx disabled to get the same effect 
>> (or disable nx cpuid in kvm).
>>     
>
> I've disabled NX in KVM and that didn't reproduce the issue in the 
> current git.
>
> If I double all of the memory caches, I can't seem to reproduce.  
> However, as soon as I reduce rmap_desc_cache down to 1, I can reproduce.
>
> I'll try to see if just setting the rmap_desc_cache line to 2 is enough 
> to make the problem go away.
>
> How can the guest provoke this BUG() based on the cache size?  Should 
> the cache size only affect performance?
>
>   

The memory caches are a little misnamed; they're really preallocation 
buffers.

They serve two purposes: to avoid allocation in atomic contexts (that's 
no longer needed since preempt notifiers) and to avoid complex error 
recovery paths.  We make sure there are enough objects to satisfy worst 
case behavior and assume all allocations will work.

Regarding the rmap memory cache failure, I can't think of a reason why 
we'll need to add more than one rmap entry per fault.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>  
>>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>    
>>>>>> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>     int r;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
>>>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
>>>>>>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
>>>>>>     if (r)
>>>>>>         goto out;
>>>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
>>>>>>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
>>>>>>     if (r)
>>>>>>         goto out;
>>>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
>>>>>>     if (r)
>>>>>>         goto out;
>>>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
>>>>>>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
>>>>>> out:
>>>>>>     return r;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>           
>>>>> These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to 
>>>>> mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.
>>>>>         
>>>> Sure.  Would this be affected at all by your tpr patch?        
>>> I believe not, but the code doesn't care what I believe.
>>>
>>>    
>>>> IIUC, if this is the problem, it should be reproducible with the 
>>>> latest git too?
>>>>       
>>> One difference is that the tpr patch disables nx.  That causes 
>>> Windows to go into 32-bit paging mode (nice that it has both pae and 
>>> nonpae in the same kernel), which may change things.
>>>
>>> You can try booting your host with nx disabled to get the same 
>>> effect (or disable nx cpuid in kvm).
>>>     
>>
>> I've disabled NX in KVM and that didn't reproduce the issue in the 
>> current git.
>>
>> If I double all of the memory caches, I can't seem to reproduce.  
>> However, as soon as I reduce rmap_desc_cache down to 1, I can reproduce.
>>
>> I'll try to see if just setting the rmap_desc_cache line to 2 is 
>> enough to make the problem go away.
>>
>> How can the guest provoke this BUG() based on the cache size?  Should 
>> the cache size only affect performance?
>>
>>   
>
> The memory caches are a little misnamed; they're really preallocation 
> buffers.
>
> They serve two purposes: to avoid allocation in atomic contexts 
> (that's no longer needed since preempt notifiers) and to avoid complex 
> error recovery paths.  We make sure there are enough objects to 
> satisfy worst case behavior and assume all allocations will work.

FWIW, two people in IRC just reported the same BUG in kvm-48 and the 
nightly snapshot.  I asked them both to post more thorough descriptions 
here.  That leads me to suspect that the problem wasn't introduced by 
your TPR optimization.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Regarding the rmap memory cache failure, I can't think of a reason why 
> we'll need to add more than one rmap entry per fault.
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1142 bytes --]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>
>>>> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>> {
>>>>     int r;
>>>>
>>>>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
>>>>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
>>>>     if (r)
>>>>         goto out;
>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
>>>>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
>>>>     if (r)
>>>>         goto out;
>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
>>>>     if (r)
>>>>         goto out;
>>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
>>>>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
>>>> out:
>>>>     return r;
>>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to 
>>> mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.
>>
>> Sure.  Would this be affected at all by your tpr patch?  

Using the following patch, I'm getting really good results.  I'll keep 
running test cases tonight and see if I can trigger anything.

Windows is *much* faster with your patch, very nice work!

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

[-- Attachment #2: tpr-out-up-rmap_desc_cache.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 919 bytes --]

Subject: [PATCH][TPR OPT] Increase rmap_desc_cache
From: Anthony Liguori <aliguori-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>

Using kvm-test to replay the second stage of a WinXP Pro install, I can
reliably trigger a BUG_ON() in the mmu.  It usually happens during the first
run.

With this patch applied, I've been able to replay the install for the past few
hours (probably 10 or so installs) without hitting the BUG_ON().

Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori <aliguori-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

--- a/kernel/mmu.c	2007-10-25 12:36:18.000000000 -0500
+++ b/kernel/mmu.c	2007-10-25 17:09:55.000000000 -0500
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@
 	if (r)
 		goto out;
 	r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
-				   rmap_desc_cache, 1);
+				   rmap_desc_cache, 2);
 	if (r)
 		goto out;
 	r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #4: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Haydn Solomon]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1708 bytes --]

I've been running windows xp sp2 all day with acpi uniprocessor HAL and it's
noticeable much faster...blazing fast. I can imagine how much faster it will
be when -smp 2 works. Once it did hang up on me after installing an office
application and prompted for registration online. Other than that it's been
superb. I'll continue using it and look out for anything unusual. Thanks and
great piece of work.

On 10/25/07, Anthony Liguori <anthony-rdkfGonbjUSkNkDKm+mE6A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >>>> {
> >>>>     int r;
> >>>>
> >>>>     kvm_mmu_free_some_pages(vcpu);
> >>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_pte_chain_cache,
> >>>>                    pte_chain_cache, 4);
> >>>>     if (r)
> >>>>         goto out;
> >>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
> >>>>                    rmap_desc_cache, 1);
> >>>>     if (r)
> >>>>         goto out;
> >>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
> >>>>     if (r)
> >>>>         goto out;
> >>>>     r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_page_header_cache,
> >>>>                    mmu_page_header_cache, 4);
> >>>> out:
> >>>>     return r;
> >>>> }
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> These are the (4, 1, 8, 4) values in the call to
> >>> mmu_topup_memory_cache.  Perhaps one of them is too low.
> >>
> >> Sure.  Would this be affected at all by your tpr patch?
>
> Using the following patch, I'm getting really good results.  I'll keep
> running test cases tonight and see if I can trigger anything.
>
> Windows is *much* faster with your patch, very nice work!
>
> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori
>
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3075 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
> Using the following patch, I'm getting really good results.  

> --- a/kernel/mmu.c	2007-10-25 12:36:18.000000000 -0500
> +++ b/kernel/mmu.c	2007-10-25 17:09:55.000000000 -0500
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@
>  	if (r)
>  		goto out;
>  	r = mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->mmu_rmap_desc_cache,
> -				   rmap_desc_cache, 1);
> +				   rmap_desc_cache, 2);
>  	if (r)
>  		goto out;
>  	r = mmu_topup_memory_cache_page(&vcpu->mmu_page_cache, 8);
>   


I think I know what's happening.

We get a write page fault on a page that's not shadowed.  Turns out it's 
a page table page, so we map it read-only, and also rmap it.

Since it's a page table page, we emulate the write and try to map the 
just-written pte as well, since it's likely somebody will access the 
memory pointed-to by the pte.  This consumes another rmap entry, and we 
go boom.

This didn't happen previously, because we didn't rmap read-only pages, 
so the first mapping did not consume an rmap entry.  With swapping 
enabled, we do map read only pages, so we see this.


The correct fix is probably to call mmu_topup_memory_pages() from where 
we do the emulated write, but this seems difficult.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Fabian Deutsch]

Hey,

> Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Haydn Solomon wrote:
> >   
> >> I also had a problem installing windows xp. Got the following error
> >>     
> >
> >
> > I guess I'll have to test that too.
> >   
> 
> I hit it again, this time about half-way through the second stage 
> install of Windows XP (last time it was almost immediately).  This is 
> with your updated tree.  I'll next try to reproduce with the latest git.
> 

I tried to install a Windows 2003 guest.
I get the following error:

http://pastebin.ca/749466

It appeard during the disk formating process.

- fabiand

> Regards,
> 
> Anthony Liguori
> 
> 
> [ 1577.621100] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 1577.621106] kernel BUG at
> /home/anthony/tmp/2/tpr-opt-1/kernel/mmu.c:308!
> [ 1577.621108] invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
> [ 1577.621111] CPU 1
> [ 1577.621113] Modules linked in: tun kvm_intel kvm i915 drm af_packet 
> rfcomm l2cap thinkpad_acpi ppdev acpi_cpufreq cpufreq_stats 
> cpufreq_ondemand freq_table cpufreq_userspace cpufreq_conservative 
> cpufreq_powersave sbs ac battery bay dock container button video ipv6 
> bridge ipt_REJECT xt_state xt_tcpudp iptable_filter ipt_MASQUERADE 
> iptable_nat nf_nat nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_conntrack nfnetlink ip_tables 
> x_tables sbp2 lp arc4 ecb blkcipher snd_hda_intel snd_pcm_oss 
> snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm snd_seq_dummy iwl4965 iwlwifi_mac80211 snd_seq_oss 
> parport_pc snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi parport cfg80211 pcmcia hci_usb 
> bluetooth snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq snd_timer snd_seq_device intel_agp 
> sdhci mmc_core serio_raw psmouse pcspkr yenta_socket rsrc_nonstatic 
> pcmcia_core snd soundcore shpchp pci_hotplug snd_page_alloc joydev evdev 
> ext3 jbd mbcache usbhid hid sg sr_mod sd_mod cdrom ata_piix ehci_hcd 
> ohci1394 ieee1394 ata_generic libata scsi_mod uhci_hcd usbcore e1000 
> thermal processor fan fuse apparmor commoncap
> [ 1577.621172] Pid: 7788, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 
> 2.6.22-14-generic #1
> [ 1577.621175] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8837d905>]  [<ffffffff8837d905>] 
> :kvm:mmu_memory_cache_alloc+0x25/0x30
> [ 1577.621188] RSP: 0018:ffff8100441819b8  EFLAGS: 00010246
> [ 1577.621190] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffc200010c1968 RCX: 
> ffff81001eebc080
> [ 1577.621193] RDX: ffff81001eebc088 RSI: 0000000000000028 RDI: 
> ffff8100388543e0
> [ 1577.621195] RBP: ffff81000377f060 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 
> 0000000000000004
> [ 1577.621197] R10: 00000000081ed163 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 
> ffff810038854000
> [ 1577.621200] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff81000377f060 R15: 
> ffff810038854000
> [ 1577.621202] FS:  00002b7827310d40(0000) GS:ffff81000102c280(0000) 
> knlGS:0000000000000000
> [ 1577.621205] CS:  0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 000000008005003b
> [ 1577.621207] CR2: 0000000001002ff8 CR3: 0000000054f45000 CR4: 
> 00000000000026e0
> [ 1577.621210] Process qemu-system-x86 (pid: 7788, threadinfo 
> ffff810044180000, task ffff81000d4d8dc0)
> [ 1577.621212] Stack:  ffffc200010c1968 ffffffff8837da16 
> 00000000441c6043 0000000000000002
> [ 1577.621216]  00000000441c6000 ffffffff8837e1ad 00002b7828552000 
> 00000000000081ed
> [ 1577.621220]  0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000000081ed000 
> 00000000081ed000
> [ 1577.621223] Call Trace:
> [ 1577.621233]  [<ffffffff8837da16>] :kvm:rmap_add+0xf6/0x110
> [ 1577.621243]  [<ffffffff8837e1ad>] 
> :kvm:paging32_set_pte_common+0x10d/0x2b0
> [ 1577.621258]  [<ffffffff8837e399>] :kvm:paging32_set_pte+0x49/0x50
> [ 1577.621269]  [<ffffffff8837e9dd>] :kvm:kvm_mmu_pte_write+0x33d/0x3b0
> [ 1577.621287]  [<ffffffff883786cd>] 
> :kvm:emulator_write_emulated_onepage+0x9d/0x100
> [ 1577.621298]  [<ffffffff88380da8>] :kvm:x86_emulate_insn+0x5e8/0x4450
> [ 1577.621308]  [<ffffffff88396467>] :kvm_intel:vmcs_readl+0x17/0x20
> [ 1577.621320]  [<ffffffff88378cff>] :kvm:emulate_instruction+0x1af/0x2f0
> [ 1577.621328]  [<ffffffff88399090>]
> :kvm_intel:handle_exception+0x240/0x2b0
> [ 1577.621336]  [<ffffffff88385ab9>] :kvm:apic_update_ppr+0x29/0x60
> [ 1577.621347]  [<ffffffff8837aa74>] :kvm:kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0xe54/0x11b0
> [ 1577.621355]  [<ffffffff8026e000>] file_read_actor+0x0/0x150
> [ 1577.621366]  [<ffffffff8022cacc>] task_rq_lock+0x4c/0x90
> [ 1577.621372]  [<ffffffff8022f30c>] try_to_wake_up+0x5c/0x3f0
> [ 1577.621385]  [<ffffffff802a84f5>] core_sys_select+0x275/0x300
> [ 1577.621391]  [<ffffffff8022ca03>] __wake_up+0x43/0x70
> [ 1577.621402]  [<ffffffff80240719>] __dequeue_signal+0x19/0x1d0
> [ 1577.621409]  [<ffffffff8023ffce>] recalc_sigpending+0xe/0x30
> [ 1577.621412]  [<ffffffff8024212c>] dequeue_signal+0x5c/0x190
> [ 1577.621416]  [<ffffffff8024f4f9>] getnstimeofday+0x39/0xa0
> [ 1577.621423]  [<ffffffff802a6e05>] do_ioctl+0x35/0xe0
> [ 1577.621428]  [<ffffffff802a6f24>] vfs_ioctl+0x74/0x2d0
> [ 1577.621435]  [<ffffffff802a7215>] sys_ioctl+0x95/0xb0
> [ 1577.621442]  [<ffffffff80209e8e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
> [ 1577.621452]
> [ 1577.621453]
> [ 1577.621454] Code: 0f 0b eb fe 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 48 81 c7 e0 03 00 
> 00 be 28
> [ 1577.621462] RIP  [<ffffffff8837d905>] 
> :kvm:mmu_memory_cache_alloc+0x25/0x30
> [ 1577.621471]  RSP <ffff8100441819b8>
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> kvm-devel mailing list
> kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

-- 
Fabian Deutsch <fabian.deutsch-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org>
Hinter dem Gartel 26a
D-27711 Osterholz-Scharmbeck


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 813 bytes --]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Jindrich Makovicka wrote:
>   
>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:39:33 -0400
>> "Haydn Solomon" <haydn.solomon-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>>   
>>     
>>> Thanks, that was quick.
>>>     
>>>       
>> Finally, this (pre)release solved the long standing Java IE Plugin
>> lockup problem for me. Thanks a lot!
>>
>>   
>>     
>
> No, this release is meant to cause problems, not fix them.
>
> (but thanks for the reminder)
>
>   

It's probably due to disabling NX (which is an unwanted side effect of 
this).  Java generates executable code, so it probably needs to modify 
protection attributes.  Maybe we're bad at this.

Can you check the attached patch?  Against normal kvm, not the windows 
accelerator.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


[-- Attachment #2: no-nx.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 392 bytes --]

diff --git a/drivers/kvm/x86.c b/drivers/kvm/x86.c
index 1fe209d..e08e749 100644
--- a/drivers/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/drivers/kvm/x86.c
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ static void cpuid_fix_nx_cap(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 			break;
 		}
 	}
-	if (entry && (entry->edx & (1 << 20)) && !(efer & EFER_NX)) {
+	if (entry) {
 		entry->edx &= ~(1 << 20);
 		printk(KERN_INFO "kvm: guest NX capability removed\n");
 	}

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #4: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Jindrich Makovicka]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:09:17 +0200
Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Avi Kivity wrote:
> It's probably due to disabling NX (which is an unwanted side effect
> of this).  Java generates executable code, so it probably needs to
> modify protection attributes.  Maybe we're bad at this.
> 
> Can you check the attached patch?  Against normal kvm, not the
> windows accelerator.
 
You are right, patched kvm-48 works too. It seems that NX is the
culprit.

-- 
Jindrich Makovicka

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 953 bytes --]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that 
> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the 
> ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses 
> by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at 
> runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.
>
> The upshot of all that is that 
> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer 
> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy 
> from my very limited testing.
>
> Please download the test release from 
> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.  
> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>
> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>
>   

Sweet!

I needed the following patch to compile.  Will let you know how testing 
goes.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

[-- Attachment #2: tpr-opt-1-compile.diff --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 487 bytes --]

diff -ur a/qemu/qemu-kvm.h b/qemu/qemu-kvm.h
--- a/qemu/qemu-kvm.h	2007-10-25 11:55:25.000000000 -0500
+++ b/qemu/qemu-kvm.h	2007-10-25 12:48:38.000000000 -0500
@@ -30,7 +30,6 @@
 
 #define ALIGN(x, y)  (((x)+(y)-1) & ~((y)-1))
 #define BITMAP_SIZE(m) (ALIGN(((m)>>TARGET_PAGE_BITS), HOST_LONG_BITS) / 8)
-#endif
 
 extern int kvm_tpr_log_enabled;
 void kvm_do_log_tpr(int write);
@@ -42,3 +41,4 @@
     if (kvm_tpr_log_enabled && addr == 0xfee00080)
 	kvm_do_log_tpr(write);
 }
+#endif

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #4: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that 
>> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the 
>> ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects 
>> accesses by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches 
>> them at runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by 
>> the BIOS.
>>
>> The upshot of all that is that 
>> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer 
>> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite 
>> snappy from my very limited testing.
>>
>> Please download the test release from 
>> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.  
>> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>>
>> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>>
>>   
>
> Sweet!
>
> I needed the following patch to compile.  Will let you know how 
> testing goes.
>

I already applied that, plus another minor fix, so I recommend 
re-downloading.  Should have given it a new name.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that 
>>> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with 
>>> the ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects 
>>> accesses by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and 
>>> patches them at runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is 
>>> provided by the BIOS.
>>>
>>> The upshot of all that is that 
>>> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer 
>>> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite 
>>> snappy from my very limited testing.
>>>
>>> Please download the test release from 
>>> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.  
>>> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>>>
>>> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>>>
>>>   
>>
>> Sweet!
>>
>> I needed the following patch to compile.  Will let you know how 
>> testing goes.
>>
>
> I already applied that, plus another minor fix, so I recommend 
> re-downloading.  Should have given it a new name.

What's the minor fix?  During the second stage of installing winxp, I 
just got the following BUG().  Have to reboot to check and see if this 
is specific to your branch.

[68630.390361] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[68630.390367] kernel BUG at /home/anthony/tmp/b/kernel/mmu.c:308!
[68630.390370] invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
[68630.390372] CPU 1
[68630.390374] Modules linked in: kvm_intel kvm nfs lockd sunrpc tun 
i915 drm af_packet rfcomm l2cap thinkpad_acpi ppdev acpi_cpufreq 
cpufreq_stats cpufreq_ondemand freq_table cpufreq_userspace 
cpufreq_conservative cpufreq_powersave sbs ac battery bay dock container 
button video ipv6 bridge ipt_REJECT xt_state xt_tcpudp iptable_filter 
ipt_MASQUERADE iptable_nat nf_nat nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_conntrack 
nfnetlink ip_tables x_tables sbp2 lp arc4 ecb blkcipher snd_hda_intel 
snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss joydev 
iwl4965 snd_seq_midi iwlwifi_mac80211 hci_usb snd_rawmidi 
snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq snd_timer bluetooth pcmcia cfg80211 usbhid 
hid sdhci mmc_core snd_seq_device serio_raw parport_pc parport 
yenta_socket rsrc_nonstatic pcmcia_core pcspkr psmouse snd soundcore 
intel_agp shpchp pci_hotplug snd_page_alloc evdev ext3 jbd mbcache sg 
sr_mod cdrom sd_mod ata_piix ohci1394 ieee1394 ata_generic libata 
scsi_mod ehci_hcd uhci_hcd usbcore e1000 thermal processor fan fuse 
apparmor commoncap
[68630.390435] Pid: 15055, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted 
2.6.22-14-generic #1
[68630.390437] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8837f905>]  [<ffffffff8837f905>] 
:kvm:mmu_memory_cache_alloc+0x25/0x30
[68630.390451] RSP: 0018:ffff810041e3b9b8  EFLAGS: 00010246
[68630.390453] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffc2000109dea0 RCX: 
ffff81003f47c080
[68630.390456] RDX: ffff81003f47c088 RSI: 0000000000000028 RDI: 
ffff810042d103e0
[68630.390458] RBP: ffff81004eaf9460 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 
0000000000000004
[68630.390460] R10: 0000000003a94163 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 
ffff810042d10000
[68630.390463] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff81004eaf9460 R15: 
ffff810042d10000
[68630.390465] FS:  00002b08de4add40(0000) GS:ffff81000102c280(0000) 
knlGS:0000000000000000
[68630.390468] CS:  0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 0000000080050033
[68630.390470] CR2: 0000000000010000 CR3: 00000000284ef000 CR4: 
00000000000026e0
[68630.390473] Process qemu-system-x86 (pid: 15055, threadinfo 
ffff810041e3a000, task ffff81003b9346e0)
[68630.390475] Stack:  ffffc2000109dea0 ffffffff8837fa16 
000000002149d043 0000000000000002
[68630.390480]  000000002149d000 ffffffff883801ad 00002b08df4e4000 
0000000000003a94
[68630.390484]  0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000003a94000 
0000000003a94000
[68630.390487] Call Trace:
[68630.390496]  [<ffffffff8837fa16>] :kvm:rmap_add+0xf6/0x110
[68630.390507]  [<ffffffff883801ad>] 
:kvm:paging32_set_pte_common+0x10d/0x2b0
[68630.390523]  [<ffffffff88380399>] :kvm:paging32_set_pte+0x49/0x50
[68630.390534]  [<ffffffff883809dd>] :kvm:kvm_mmu_pte_write+0x33d/0x3b0
[68630.390553]  [<ffffffff8837a6cd>] 
:kvm:emulator_write_emulated_onepage+0x9d/0x100
[68630.390564]  [<ffffffff88382da8>] :kvm:x86_emulate_insn+0x5e8/0x4450
[68630.390574]  [<ffffffff8855f467>] :kvm_intel:vmcs_readl+0x17/0x20
[68630.390586]  [<ffffffff8837acff>] :kvm:emulate_instruction+0x1af/0x2f0
[68630.390596]  [<ffffffff88562090>] :kvm_intel:handle_exception+0x240/0x2b0
[68630.390603]  [<ffffffff88387aa9>] :kvm:apic_update_ppr+0x29/0x60
[68630.390615]  [<ffffffff8837ca74>] :kvm:kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0xe54/0x11b0
[68630.390622]  [<ffffffff8026e624>] add_to_page_cache_lru+0x24/0x40
[68630.390628]  [<ffffffff8028f088>] shmem_getpage+0x298/0x7e0
[68630.390652]  [<ffffffff802a84f5>] core_sys_select+0x275/0x300
[68630.390670]  [<ffffffff80240719>] __dequeue_signal+0x19/0x1d0
[68630.390677]  [<ffffffff8023ffce>] recalc_sigpending+0xe/0x30
[68630.390680]  [<ffffffff8024212c>] dequeue_signal+0x5c/0x190
[68630.390685]  [<ffffffff8024f4f9>] getnstimeofday+0x39/0xa0
[68630.390692]  [<ffffffff802a6e05>] do_ioctl+0x35/0xe0
[68630.390698]  [<ffffffff802a6f24>] vfs_ioctl+0x74/0x2d0
[68630.390705]  [<ffffffff802a7215>] sys_ioctl+0x95/0xb0
[68630.390712]  [<ffffffff80209e8e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[68630.390723]
[68630.390724]
[68630.390725] Code: 0f 0b eb fe 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 48 81 c7 e0 03 00 
00 be 28
[68630.390733] RIP  [<ffffffff8837f905>] 
:kvm:mmu_memory_cache_alloc+0x25/0x30
[68630.390742]  RSP <ffff810041e3b9b8>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that 
>>>> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with 
>>>> the ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects 
>>>> accesses by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and 
>>>> patches them at runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is 
>>>> provided by the BIOS.
>>>>
>>>> The upshot of all that is that 
>>>> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no 
>>>> longer required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's 
>>>> quite snappy from my very limited testing.
>>>>
>>>> Please download the test release from 
>>>> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a 
>>>> spin.  Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into 
>>>> mainline.
>>>>
>>>> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>
>>> Sweet!
>>>
>>> I needed the following patch to compile.  Will let you know how 
>>> testing goes.
>>>
>>
>> I already applied that, plus another minor fix, so I recommend 
>> re-downloading.  Should have given it a new name.
>
> What's the minor fix?  During the second stage of installing winxp, I 
> just got the following BUG().  Have to reboot to check and see if this 
> is specific to your branch.
>

Unrelated to the below, I guess.  It prevents BSODs, not BUGs.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that 
> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the 
> ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses 
> by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at 
> runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.
>
> The upshot of all that is that 
> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer 
> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy 
> from my very limited testing.
>
> Please download the test release from 
> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.  
> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>
> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>   

BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?  Ignoring the 
fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a 
guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of problems 
could occur.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that 
>> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the 
>> ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses 
>> by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at 
>> runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.
>>
>> The upshot of all that is that 
>> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer 
>> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy 
>> from my very limited testing.
>>
>> Please download the test release from 
>> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.  
>> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>>
>> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>>   
>>     
>
> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?  Ignoring the 
> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a 
> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of problems 
> could occur

I'd like to make this the default and add an option to disable it.

The code is careful to try to detect Windows, and we can tighten the 
check in case it misfires.  I'd like things to Just Work (they may also 
Just Crash, but hopefully we can fix this).


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Dong, Eddie]

> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
> Ignoring the
> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of problems
> could occur. 
> 
Good movement!

But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista 
will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option
to check if it is vista.

Eddie

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Dong, Eddie wrote:
>> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
>> Ignoring the
>> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
>> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of problems
>> could occur. 
>>
>>     
> Good movement!
>
> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista 
> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option
> to check if it is vista.
>
>   

Thanks for the hint; I'll add that.  I think Vista hits the tpr much 
less frequently, so it can work well without the optimization.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Dong, Eddie]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>>> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
>>> Ignoring the
>>> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
>>> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of
>>> problems could occur. 
>>> 
>>> 
>> Good movement!
>> 
>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista
>> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option to
>> check if it is vista. 
>> 
>> 
> 
> Thanks for the hint; I'll add that.  I think Vista hits the tpr much
> less frequently, so it can work well without the optimization.
> 
Curious: How do u know ROM is mapped 0xf00000000 in Windows?
Eddie


    kvm_get_sregs(kvm_context, env->cpu_index, &sregs);

    probe = (rip & 0xf0000000) + 0xe0000;
    phys = map_addr(&sregs, probe, &perms);
    if (phys != 0xe0000)
	return 0;
    printf("bios ok at %lx\n", (long)probe);

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Dong, Eddie wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>> Thanks for the hint; I'll add that.  I think Vista hits the tpr much
>> less frequently, so it can work well without the optimization.
>>
>>     
> Curious: How do u know ROM is mapped 0xf00000000 in Windows?
> Eddie
>
>
>     kvm_get_sregs(kvm_context, env->cpu_index, &sregs);
>
>     probe = (rip & 0xf0000000) + 0xe0000;
>     phys = map_addr(&sregs, probe, &perms);
>     if (phys != 0xe0000)
> 	return 0;
>     printf("bios ok at %lx\n", (long)probe);
>   

I checked :)

It's actually not mapped at 0xf0000000.  On normal Windows XP it is 
mapped at 0x80000000, with /3GB it is mapped at 0xe0000000.  The code 
checks it is within the same 256MB segment as the code that's hitting 
tpr.  It could probably be improved.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Dong, Eddie wrote:
>> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
>> Ignoring the
>> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
>> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of problems
>> could occur. 
>>
>>     
> Good movement!
>
> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista 
> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option
> to check if it is vista.
>   

Are you sure that Vista isn't just verifying memory during 
startup/driver load?  Seems odd to periodically scan memory.

In the recently released Windows Hypervisor specification, in section 
13.2.2 (Local APIC Memory-mapped Accesses), it's dictated that the APIC 
can only be accessed through 6 instructions.  They are all >= 5 byte 
instructions.  When I first saw that, I figured they were also patching.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Eddie
>
>   


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>
>> Good movement!
>>
>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista 
>> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option
>> to check if it is vista.
>>   
>>     
>
> Are you sure that Vista isn't just verifying memory during 
> startup/driver load?  Seems odd to periodically scan memory.
>
> In the recently released Windows Hypervisor specification, in section 
> 13.2.2 (Local APIC Memory-mapped Accesses), it's dictated that the APIC 
> can only be accessed through 6 instructions.  They are all >= 5 byte 
> instructions.  When I first saw that, I figured they were also patching.
>   

Six?  My hack patches five.  Which one did I miss?


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>
>>> Good movement!
>>>
>>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista will 
>>> make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option
>>> to check if it is vista.
>>>       
>>
>> Are you sure that Vista isn't just verifying memory during 
>> startup/driver load?  Seems odd to periodically scan memory.
>>
>> In the recently released Windows Hypervisor specification, in section 
>> 13.2.2 (Local APIC Memory-mapped Accesses), it's dictated that the 
>> APIC can only be accessed through 6 instructions.  They are all >= 5 
>> byte instructions.  When I first saw that, I figured they were also 
>> patching.
>>   
>
> Six?  My hack patches five.  Which one did I miss?

FF /6  PUSH m32

Also note, that it says that all addresses are required to be 4-byte 
aligned.

Regards,

Anthony LIguori


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Good movement!
>>>>
>>>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista will 
>>>> make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option
>>>> to check if it is vista.
>>>>       
>>>
>>> Are you sure that Vista isn't just verifying memory during 
>>> startup/driver load?  Seems odd to periodically scan memory.
>>>
>>> In the recently released Windows Hypervisor specification, in 
>>> section 13.2.2 (Local APIC Memory-mapped Accesses), it's dictated 
>>> that the APIC can only be accessed through 6 instructions.  They are 
>>> all >= 5 byte instructions.  When I first saw that, I figured they 
>>> were also patching.
>>>   
>>
>> Six?  My hack patches five.  Which one did I miss?
>
> FF /6  PUSH m32
>

Thanks.  That's easy to add.

> Also note, that it says that all addresses are required to be 4-byte 
> aligned.

Which addresses?  The tpr address is obviously 4 byte aligned.

The instruction pointer?!

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Good movement!
>>>>>
>>>>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista 
>>>>> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option
>>>>> to check if it is vista.
>>>>>       
>>>>
>>>> Are you sure that Vista isn't just verifying memory during 
>>>> startup/driver load?  Seems odd to periodically scan memory.
>>>>
>>>> In the recently released Windows Hypervisor specification, in 
>>>> section 13.2.2 (Local APIC Memory-mapped Accesses), it's dictated 
>>>> that the APIC can only be accessed through 6 instructions.  They 
>>>> are all >= 5 byte instructions.  When I first saw that, I figured 
>>>> they were also patching.
>>>>   
>>>
>>> Six?  My hack patches five.  Which one did I miss?
>>
>> FF /6  PUSH m32
>>
>
> Thanks.  That's easy to add.
>
>> Also note, that it says that all addresses are required to be 4-byte 
>> aligned.
>
> Which addresses?  The tpr address is obviously 4 byte aligned.

The tpr address.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> The instruction pointer?!
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Dong, Eddie wrote:
>> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
>> Ignoring the
>> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
>> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of problems
>> could occur. 
>>
>>     
> Good movement!
>
> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista 
> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option
> to check if it is vista.
>   

FWIW, I successfully installed and booted Vista Enterprise Edition with 
the TPR optimization patch.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Eddie
>
>   


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Dong, Eddie]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>>> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
>>> Ignoring the
>>> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
>>> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of
>>> problems could occur. 
>>> 
>>> 
>> Good movement!
>> 
>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista
>> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option to
>> check if it is vista. 
>> 
> 
> FWIW, I successfully installed and booted Vista Enterprise Edition
> with the TPR optimization patch.
> 
32 bits or 64 bits?
See
http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsvistasecurity/archive/2006/08/11/695993.asp
x

It says:

There are many brand new security features in Windows Vista, but Kernel
Patch Protection is actually not one of them. Kernel Patch Protection
was first supported on x64 (AMD64 and Intel EMT64T) CPU architecture
versions of Microsoft Windows including Microsoft Windows Server 2003
SP1 and Windows XP Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition. (Patch
protection is currently not supported on x86 or ia64 architectures.)
Though, as the use of 64-bit computers is increasing, Windows Vista
users will end up benefiting most from this technology. 

Seems Vista 32 is not using patchguard yet, not sure about next SP.
If above is true, it looks like we are OK for current stage.
thx,eddie

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Dong, Eddie wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>   
>> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>>     
>>>> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
>>>> Ignoring the
>>>> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
>>>> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of
>>>> problems could occur. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Good movement!
>>>
>>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista
>>> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option to
>>> check if it is vista. 
>>>
>>>       
>> FWIW, I successfully installed and booted Vista Enterprise Edition
>> with the TPR optimization patch.
>>
>>     
> 32 bits or 64 bits?
> See
> http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsvistasecurity/archive/2006/08/11/695993.asp
> x
>
> It says:
>
> There are many brand new security features in Windows Vista, but Kernel
> Patch Protection is actually not one of them. Kernel Patch Protection
> was first supported on x64 (AMD64 and Intel EMT64T) CPU architecture
> versions of Microsoft Windows including Microsoft Windows Server 2003
> SP1 and Windows XP Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition. (Patch
> protection is currently not supported on x86 or ia64 architectures.)
> Though, as the use of 64-bit computers is increasing, Windows Vista
> users will end up benefiting most from this technology. 
>
> Seems Vista 32 is not using patchguard yet, not sure about next SP.
> If above is true, it looks like we are OK for current stage.
> thx,eddie
>   

I tested 32-bit Vista.  We'll have to try 64-bit Vista and see if it 
gets upset.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>  
>>> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>>>    
>>>>> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
>>>>> Ignoring the
>>>>> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
>>>>> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of
>>>>> problems could occur.
>>>>>
>>>>>         
>>>> Good movement!
>>>>
>>>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista
>>>> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option to
>>>> check if it is vista.
>>>>       
>>> FWIW, I successfully installed and booted Vista Enterprise Edition
>>> with the TPR optimization patch.
>>>
>>>     
>> 32 bits or 64 bits?
>> See
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsvistasecurity/archive/2006/08/11/695993.asp
>> x
>>
>> It says:
>>
>> There are many brand new security features in Windows Vista, but Kernel
>> Patch Protection is actually not one of them. Kernel Patch Protection
>> was first supported on x64 (AMD64 and Intel EMT64T) CPU architecture
>> versions of Microsoft Windows including Microsoft Windows Server 2003
>> SP1 and Windows XP Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition. (Patch
>> protection is currently not supported on x86 or ia64 architectures.)
>> Though, as the use of 64-bit computers is increasing, Windows Vista
>> users will end up benefiting most from this technology.
>> Seems Vista 32 is not using patchguard yet, not sure about next SP.
>> If above is true, it looks like we are OK for current stage.
>> thx,eddie
>>   
>
> I tested 32-bit Vista.  We'll have to try 64-bit Vista and see if it 
> gets upset.
>

btw, it may have not triggered because the hack didn't recognize Vista's 
memory map.



-- 
Any sufficiently difficult bug is indistinguishable from a feature.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>  
>>>> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>>> BTW, is it wise to enable this by default for all guests?
>>>>>> Ignoring the
>>>>>> fact that we're modifying guest's memory without its knowledge, if a
>>>>>> guest unmaps the VA mappings for the BIOS then all sorts of
>>>>>> problems could occur.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         
>>>>> Good movement!
>>>>>
>>>>> But, Vista won't work with patching. The memory guard in vista
>>>>> will make the system refuse to service. Maybe we need a option to
>>>>> check if it is vista.
>>>>>       
>>>> FWIW, I successfully installed and booted Vista Enterprise Edition
>>>> with the TPR optimization patch.
>>>>
>>>>     
>>> 32 bits or 64 bits?
>>> See
>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsvistasecurity/archive/2006/08/11/695993.asp 
>>>
>>> x
>>>
>>> It says:
>>>
>>> There are many brand new security features in Windows Vista, but Kernel
>>> Patch Protection is actually not one of them. Kernel Patch Protection
>>> was first supported on x64 (AMD64 and Intel EMT64T) CPU architecture
>>> versions of Microsoft Windows including Microsoft Windows Server 2003
>>> SP1 and Windows XP Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition. 
>>> (Patch
>>> protection is currently not supported on x86 or ia64 architectures.)
>>> Though, as the use of 64-bit computers is increasing, Windows Vista
>>> users will end up benefiting most from this technology.
>>> Seems Vista 32 is not using patchguard yet, not sure about next SP.
>>> If above is true, it looks like we are OK for current stage.
>>> thx,eddie
>>>   
>>
>> I tested 32-bit Vista.  We'll have to try 64-bit Vista and see if it 
>> gets upset.
>>
>
> btw, it may have not triggered because the hack didn't recognize 
> Vista's memory map.
>

It successfully patched instructions.  Not as many as with XP but it was 
at least a few.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Gildas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3289 bytes --]

2007/10/25, Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>:
> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that
> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the
> ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses
> by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at
> runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.
>
> The upshot of all that is that
> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer
> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy
> from my very limited testing.
>
> Please download the test release from
> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.
> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>
> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>
> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Hi Avi,

On an intel machine running 64 bits ubuntu with kernel 2.6.20, using
the archive downloaded this morning at 10 o'clock GMT with the
following md5sum:

6a793d217a067ede35b41684395446e9  ../sources/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz

I tried to install windows xp sp2 with the following command line:
qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 2 -m 1024 -hda /dev/vg1/winxp -cdrom
/home/gl03/iso/xpsp2_install_cd.iso

First part of the install goes fine but after the reboot it BSOD with
DRIVER_IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL (see snapshot included).

Latest lines of dmesg:

[83827.197075] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83827.209680] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83827.209733] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83827.769998] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83827.770056] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83828.703089] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83828.705896] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83828.710527] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83828.718736] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83828.747251] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83828.774862] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83830.262231] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83838.101244] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83841.053300] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83841.053359] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83858.432652] Fault when IDT_Vectoring
[83858.432693] Fault when IDT_Vectoring

Latest lines in the console:

check insn
rip: 807033de
insn: c7 05
instruction ok at 807033e4 tpr fffe0080
check bios
bios ok at 800e0000
vapic_phys e2000
patching insn at 807033de
insn: c7 05
patched code: 807033de 68 41 00 00 00 e8 fc dc 9d ff
check insn
rip: 80703b39
insn: 8b 0d
instruction ok at 80703b3f tpr fffe0080
check bios
bios ok at 800e0000
vapic_phys e2000
patching insn at 80703b39
insn: 8b 0d
patched code: 80703b39 90 e8 71 d5 9d ff a3 80 00 fe
check insn
rip: 80703b3f
insn: a3 80
instruction ok at 80703b44 tpr fffe0080
check bios
bios ok at 800e0000
vapic_phys e2000
patching insn at 80703b3f
insn: a3 80
patched code: 80703b3f e8 99 d5 9d ff 9d 83 c4 08 c1
check insn
rip: 807039cc
insn: 89 0d
instruction ok at 807039d2 tpr fffe0080
check bios
bios ok at 800e0000
vapic_phys e2000
patching insn at 807039cc
insn: 89 0d
patched code: 807039cc 51 e8 12 d7 9d ff a1 80 00 fe
check insn
rip: 807039d2
insn: a1 80
instruction ok at 807039d7 tpr fffe0080
check bios
bios ok at 800e0000
vapic_phys e2000
patching insn at 807039d2
insn: a1 80
patched code: 807039d2 e8 a9 d6 9d ff 33 c0 f3 90 c3

Regards,
Gildas

[-- Attachment #2: winxp_ptr_opt_BSOD.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 11971 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #4: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Gildas wrote:
> 2007/10/25, Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>:
>   
>> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that
>> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the
>> ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses
>> by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at
>> runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.
>>
>> The upshot of all that is that
>> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer
>> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy
>> from my very limited testing.
>>
>> Please download the test release from
>> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.
>> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>>
>> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>>
>> --
>> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
>>     
>
> Hi Avi,
>
> On an intel machine running 64 bits ubuntu with kernel 2.6.20, using
> the archive downloaded this morning at 10 o'clock GMT with the
> following md5sum:
>
>   

Right, installs seem not to like this release, but running an existing 
VM seems to work fine (mostly).


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Gildas]

2007/10/26, Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>:
> Gildas wrote:
> > 2007/10/25, Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>:
> >
> >> This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that
> >> dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the
> >> ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses
> >> by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at
> >> runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.
> >>
> >> The upshot of all that is that
> >> http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer
> >> required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy
> >> from my very limited testing.
> >>
> >> Please download the test release from
> >> http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.
> >> Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
> >>
> >> Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
> >>
> >> --
> >> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
> >>
> >
> > Hi Avi,
> >
> > On an intel machine running 64 bits ubuntu with kernel 2.6.20, using
> > the archive downloaded this morning at 10 o'clock GMT with the
> > following md5sum:
> >
> >
>
> Right, installs seem not to like this release, but running an existing
> VM seems to work fine (mostly).

A windows 2000 sp4 installation crashes as well (this time with
WORKER_THREAD_RETURNED_A_BAD_IRQL). This was reproduceable. I've
restarted the installation with -no-kvm-irq and it seems to work fine
so long (it didn't crash where it crashed previously).

I've restarted windows xp install and this time I had the following:
[86852.991254] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[86852.991260] kernel BUG at /home/gl03/sources/tpr-opt-1/kernel/mmu.c:308!
[86852.991262] invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
[86852.991265] CPU 1
[86852.991267] Modules linked in: kvm_intel kvm binfmt_misc rfcomm
l2cap bluetooth ppdev i915 drm acpi_cpufreq cpufreq_ondemand
cpufreq_powersave cpufreq_stats freq_table cpufreq_userspace
cpufreq_conservative dev_acpi sony_acpi tc1100_wmi pcc_acpi sbs i2c_ec
i2c_core battery ac video asus_acpi button backlight dock container
ipv6 nls_utf8 ntfs sbp2 lp fuse joydev pcmcia snd_hda_intel
snd_hda_codec snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm snd_seq_dummy
snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi yenta_socket rsrc_nonstatic
pcmcia_core iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support af_packet snd_seq_midi_event
snd_seq ipw3945 tifm_7xx1 parport_pc parport sdhci snd_timer
snd_seq_device pcspkr tpm_infineon tpm tpm_bios serio_raw ieee80211
ieee80211_crypt mmc_core intel_agp psmouse tifm_core snd soundcore
snd_page_alloc shpchp pci_hotplug tsdev evdev sr_mod cdrom generic
ext3 jbd mbcache sg sd_mod ohci1394 ieee1394 ata_piix tg3 ahci
ehci_hcd uhci_hcd usbcore ata_generic libata scsi_mod thermal
processor fan dm_mod fbcon tileblit font bitblit softcursor vesafb
cfbcopyarea cfbimgblt cfbfillrect capability commoncap
[86852.991337] Pid: 12492, comm: qemu-system-x86 Not tainted
2.6.20-16-generic #2
[86852.991340] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff883aa877>]  [<ffffffff883aa877>]
:kvm:mmu_memory_cache_alloc+0x7/0x30
[86852.991354] RSP: 0018:ffff810024b039c8  EFLAGS: 00010246
[86852.991356] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffc2000082a868 RCX: ffff810033c54080
[86852.991359] RDX: ffff810033c54088 RSI: 0000000000000028 RDI: ffff810025232820
[86852.991361] RBP: ffff810034771750 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000004
[86852.991363] R10: 00000000145cd963 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff810025232440
[86852.991366] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff810034771750 R15: ffff810025232440
[86852.991369] FS:  00002acc64f8a5b0(0000) GS:ffff81007dbd8ec0(0000)
knlGS:0000000000000000
[86852.991372] CS:  0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 000000008005003b
[86852.991374] CR2: 0000000001001ad8 CR3: 0000000008b86000 CR4: 00000000000026e0
[86852.991377] Process qemu-system-x86 (pid: 12492, threadinfo
ffff810024b02000, task ffff8100713c9820)
[86852.991379] Stack:  ffffc2000082a868 ffffffff883aa95c
000000002a6c6043 0000000000000002
[86852.991384]  000000002a6c6000 ffffffff883ab2ab 0000000000000001
00000000000145cd
[86852.991388]  0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000000145cd000
00000000145cd000
[86852.991391] Call Trace:
[86852.991402]  [<ffffffff883aa95c>] :kvm:rmap_add+0xac/0x130
[86852.991414]  [<ffffffff883ab2ab>] :kvm:paging32_set_pte_common+0x1fb/0x270
[86852.991434]  [<ffffffff883ab369>] :kvm:paging32_set_pte+0x49/0x50
[86852.991448]  [<ffffffff883ab8b3>] :kvm:kvm_mmu_pte_write+0x273/0x380
[86852.991472]  [<ffffffff883a5685>]
:kvm:emulator_write_emulated_onepage+0x85/0x100
[86852.991485]  [<ffffffff883b022a>] :kvm:x86_emulate_insn+0x2b9a/0x4200
[86852.991497]  [<ffffffff883c24f7>] :kvm_intel:vmcs_readl+0x17/0x20
[86852.991512]  [<ffffffff883a5c74>] :kvm:emulate_instruction+0x174/0x2d0
[86852.991524]  [<ffffffff883c501f>] :kvm_intel:handle_exception+0x18f/0x290
[86852.991532]  [<ffffffff883b2739>] :kvm:apic_update_ppr+0x29/0x60
[86852.991546]  [<ffffffff883a6fb1>] :kvm:kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x411/0x1120
[86852.991553]  [<ffffffff8028b6e8>] __activate_task+0x38/0x60
[86852.991560]  [<ffffffff80248dac>] try_to_wake_up+0x3dc/0x400
[86852.991577]  [<ffffffff8028b454>] __wake_up_common+0x44/0x80
[86852.991587]  [<ffffffff8022f7a3>] __wake_up+0x43/0x70
[86852.991598]  [<ffffffff802dd1e9>] core_sys_select+0x289/0x2e0
[86852.991620]  [<ffffffff8029a058>] __dequeue_signal+0x168/0x1e0
[86852.991629]  [<ffffffff80270a74>] do_gettimeofday+0x44/0x90
[86852.991637]  [<ffffffff8025de20>] getnstimeofday+0x10/0x30
[86852.991648]  [<ffffffff8024362f>] do_ioctl+0x2f/0xa0
[86852.991654]  [<ffffffff80231592>] vfs_ioctl+0x2a2/0x2e0
[86852.991664]  [<ffffffff8024e7dc>] sys_ioctl+0x6c/0xb0
[86852.991673]  [<ffffffff8026111e>] system_call+0x7e/0x83
[86852.991688]
[86852.991690]
[86852.991690] Code: 0f 0b 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 eb fe 83 e8 01 48 89
f2 31 f6 89
[86852.991700] RIP  [<ffffffff883aa877>] :kvm:mmu_memory_cache_alloc+0x7/0x30
[86852.991709]  RSP <ffff810024b039c8>
[86852.991711]  <6>kvm: guest NX capability removed
[86883.412300] kvm: guest NX capability removed

process is in defunct/zombi mode now and can't be killed.

Regards,
Gildas

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

Gildas wrote:
>>>       
>> Right, installs seem not to like this release, but running an existing
>> VM seems to work fine (mostly).
>>     
>
> A windows 2000 sp4 installation crashes as well (this time with
> WORKER_THREAD_RETURNED_A_BAD_IRQL). This was reproduceable. I've
> restarted the installation with -no-kvm-irq and it seems to work fine
> so long (it didn't crash where it crashed previously).
>   

no-kvm-irq kills the optimization, though.

> I've restarted windows xp install and this time I had the following:
> [86852.991254] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [86852.991260] kernel BUG at /home/gl03/sources/tpr-opt-1/kernel/mmu.c:308!
>   



Anthony posted a fix for this (which I don't understand yet).

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Remove hardware from host and add to guest?

[Back, Michael (ext)]

Hi,
is it with kvm possible to remove a hardware (for example: a second
PCI-E Graphiccard)- mybe on boottime like by xen.
And add dedicated this removed hardware (for example: a second PCI-E
Graphiccard) to a guest system (for example: to improve the 3D-Graphic).

With best regards,
Michael

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Re: Remove hardware from host and add to guest?

[Dor Laor]

Back, Michael (ext) wrote:
>
> Hi,
> is it with kvm possible to remove a hardware (for example: a second
> PCI-E Graphiccard)- mybe on boottime like by xen.
> And add dedicated this removed hardware (for example: a second PCI-E
> Graphiccard) to a guest system (for example: to improve the 3D-Graphic).
>
> With best regards,
> Michael
>
We have code for regular pci and non-shared interrupts.
It is capable of doing nic pass through. We're in the process of merging 
them with
latest kvm code.
Regards,
Dor.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> kvm-devel mailing list
> kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

Test for the feature, RE: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Zhao, Yunfeng]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4988 bytes --]

I didn't some tests against the release.
Basically, it works well, and no any new regressions has been introduced.
The booting speed of windows is also much faster.

But I still failed to boot 64bit smp XP and 2k3.
And after run a series of tests, I found a defunct qemu process.
############################################################
[root@vt-dp8 ~]# ps aux|grep qemu
root     12645  0.0  0.0  60284   720 pts/7    S+   22:30   0:00 grep qemu
root     20656  0.3  0.0      0     0 ?        Zl   20:37   0:20 [qemu-system-x86] <defunct>
############################################################
I checked the log, it happened when creating 64bit vista.
If run the test case separately, the issue will not happen.

I also noticed some kernel message printed on console
###########################################################
Message from syslogd@vt-dp8 at Mon Oct 29 20:38:07 2007 ...
vt-dp8 kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------

Message from syslogd@vt-dp8 at Mon Oct 29 20:38:07 2007 ...
vt-dp8 kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------

Message from syslogd@vt-dp8 at Mon Oct 29 20:38:07 2007 ...
vt-dp8 kernel: invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP 

Message from syslogd@vt-dp8 at Mon Oct 29 20:38:07 2007 ...
vt-dp8 kernel: invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP 
 ############################################################


1. boot four 32-bit guest in parallel                             PASS
2. boot four 64-bit guest in parallel                             PASS
3. boot 4G 64-bit guest                                              FAIL
4. boot 4G pae guest                                                  PASS
5. boot 32-bit linux and 32 bit windows guest in parallel        PASS
6. boot 32-bit guest with 1500M memory                     PASS
7. boot 64-bit guest with 1500M memory                     PASS
8. boot 32-bit guest with 256M memory                       PASS
9. boot 64-bit guest with 256M memory                       PASS
10. boot two 32-bit windows xp in parallel                   PASS
11. boot four 32-bit different guest in para                  PASS
12. save/restore 64-bit linux guests                             FAIL
13. save/restore 32-bit linux guests                             FAIL
14. boot 32-bit SMP windows 2003 with ACPI enabled      PASS
15. boot 32bit SMP Windows 2000 with ACPI enabled      FAIL
16. boot 32-bit SMP Windows xp with ACPI enabled          FAIL
17. boot 32-bit Windows 2000 without ACPI                     PASS
18. boot 64-bit Windows xp with ACPI enabled               PASS
19. boot 32-bit Windows xp without ACPI                     PASS
20. boot 64-bit vista                                        FAIL
21. kernel build in 32-bit linux guest OS                         PASS
22. kernel build in 64-bit linux guest OS                         PASS
23. LTP on SMP 32-bit linux guest OS                           PASS
24. LTP on SMP 64-bit linux guest OS                           PASS
25. boot 64-bit guests with ACPI enabled                       PASS
26. boot 32-bit x-server                                        PASS
27. boot 64-bit SMP windows XP with ACPI enabled        FAIL
28. boot 64-bit SMP windows 2003 with ACPI enabled    FAIL

>-----Original Message-----
>From: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
>[mailto:kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Avi Kivity
>Sent: 2007年10月26日 1:24
>To: kvm-devel
>Subject: [kvm-devel] [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization
>
>This is a request for testing of an experimental kvm feature that
>dramatically accelerates some Windows releases (when running with the
>ACPI HAL, and especially with guest SMP).  The feature detects accesses
>by the guest to the Task Priority Register (TPR) and patches them at
>runtime to a kvm-friendly code snipped that is provided by the BIOS.
>
>The upshot of all that is that
>http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Windows_ACPI_Workaround is no longer
>required, and Windows SMP no longer runs like a dog; it's quite snappy
>from my very limited testing.
>
>Please download the test release from
>http://people.qumranet.com/avi/tpr-opt-1.tar.gz and give it a spin.
>Once it has received some exposure, I'll merge it into mainline.
>
>Credit for the original idea is due to Ben Serebrin.
>
>--
>error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
>Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
>Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
>Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
>_______________________________________________
>kvm-devel mailing list
>kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: Test for the feature RE: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1049 bytes --]

Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
> I didn't some tests against the release.
> Basically, it works well, and no any new regressions has been introduced.
> The booting speed of windows is also much faster.
>
> But I still failed to boot 64bit smp XP and 2k3.
> And after run a series of tests, I found a defunct qemu process.
> ############################################################
> [root@vt-dp8 ~]# ps aux|grep qemu
> root     12645  0.0  0.0  60284   720 pts/7    S+   22:30   0:00 grep qemu
> root     20656  0.3  0.0      0     0 ?        Zl   20:37   0:20 [qemu-system-x86] <defunct>
> ############################################################
> I checked the log, it happened when creating 64bit vista.
> If run the test case separately, the issue will not happen.
>
>   

A bug was fixed in mainline for this issue, so it is not related to the
optimization. I still need to make sure it doesn't harm 64-bit Windows.

I'll rebase and release a new version in a few days.

-- 
Any sufficiently difficult bug is indistinguishable from a feature.



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: Test for the feature RE: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Anthony Liguori]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1829 bytes --]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
>   
>> I didn't some tests against the release.
>> Basically, it works well, and no any new regressions has been introduced.
>> The booting speed of windows is also much faster.
>>
>> But I still failed to boot 64bit smp XP and 2k3.
>> And after run a series of tests, I found a defunct qemu process.
>> ############################################################
>> [root@vt-dp8 ~]# ps aux|grep qemu
>> root     12645  0.0  0.0  60284   720 pts/7    S+   22:30   0:00 grep qemu
>> root     20656  0.3  0.0      0     0 ?        Zl   20:37   0:20 [qemu-system-x86] <defunct>
>> ############################################################
>> I checked the log, it happened when creating 64bit vista.
>> If run the test case separately, the issue will not happen.
>>
>>   
>>     
>
> A bug was fixed in mainline for this issue, so it is not related to the
> optimization. I still need to make sure it doesn't harm 64-bit Windows.
>   

Does 64-bit Windows ever access the TPR through MMIO? Wouldn't it just
use cr8?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> I'll rebase and release a new version in a few days.
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> kvm-devel mailing list
> kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
>   



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: Test for the feature RE: [RFT] kvm with Windows optimization

[Avi Kivity]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1348 bytes --]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> I didn't some tests against the release.
>>> Basically, it works well, and no any new regressions has been introduced.
>>> The booting speed of windows is also much faster.
>>>
>>> But I still failed to boot 64bit smp XP and 2k3.
>>> And after run a series of tests, I found a defunct qemu process.
>>> ############################################################
>>> [root@vt-dp8 ~]# ps aux|grep qemu
>>> root     12645  0.0  0.0  60284   720 pts/7    S+   22:30   0:00 grep qemu
>>> root     20656  0.3  0.0      0     0 ?        Zl   20:37   0:20 [qemu-system-x86] <defunct>
>>> ############################################################
>>> I checked the log, it happened when creating 64bit vista.
>>> If run the test case separately, the issue will not happen.
>>>
>>>   
>>>     
>>>       
>> A bug was fixed in mainline for this issue, so it is not related to the
>> optimization. I still need to make sure it doesn't harm 64-bit Windows.
>>   
>>     
>
> Does 64-bit Windows ever access the TPR through MMIO? Wouldn't it just
> use cr8?
>   

It always uses cr8. However my slash'n'burn did touch something
cr8-related, so I can't be sure 64-bit Windows isn't affected.

-- 
Any sufficiently difficult bug is indistinguishable from a feature.



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel