From: Leonardo Bras <leo.bras@arm.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Leonardo Bras <leo.bras@arm.com>,
Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm64: Introduce S2 walker SKIP return options
Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 14:45:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <agsYF-Dav2bpxWK4@devkitleo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <agrTQMw4QJX6HGrm@willie-the-truck>
Hello Oliver, Will,
Thanks for reviewing!
On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 09:52:16AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 12:22:47AM -0700, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 08:59:02PM +0100, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> > > Introduce S2 walker return values:
> > > - SKIP_CHILDREN: skip walking the children of the current node
> > > - SKIP_SIBLINGS: skip waling the siblings of the current node
> > >
> > > Also, modify __kvm_pgtable_visit() to fulfil the hing on above return
> > > values. Current walkers should not be impacted
> >
> > I'd rather see something based around new walk flags than introducing an
> > entirely new mechanic around return values.
> >
> > e.g. you could split the LEAF flag into separate flags for blocks v.
> > pages:
> >
> > KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_PAGE,
> > KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_BLOCK,
> > KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_LEAF = KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_PAGE |
> > KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_BLOCK,
> >
> > and then let __kvm_pgtable_visit() decide how to steer the walk. You may
> > need some special handling to get the address arithmetic right when
> > skipping over a table of page descriptors.
I am probably not getting the whole inner workings of this solution, but
IIUC the idea would be to walk the blocks, but not the pages, right?
Blocks meaning level2- and pages being level3?
> I was wondering along similar lines, but maybe it would be useful just
> to pass a maximum level to the walker logic? That feels like the most
> general case without complicating the existing logic.
This proposal seems simpler for me to understand, and indeed looks like a
better solution than what I have proposed, taking care of the
'already split' case with better performance, as it don't even walk a
single level-3 entry.
On the 'splitting' case, it also works flawlessly if the memory is given in
level-2 blocks. There is only one case that I would like to address here:
- Memory given in level-1 blocks (say 1GB)
- Walker flag says 'walk down to level-2 only'
- Split Walker on level-1 will break page down to (up to) level-3 entries.
- Walker will continue to be called on level-2 entries, even though it's
not necessary.
To solve this, I would like to suggest a new flag, that skips a table
that has just been created. This could be easily implemented in
__kvm_page_visit() on top of the max level flags suggested.
enum kvm_pgtable_walk_flags {
[...]
KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_SKIP_LEVEL3 = BIT(7),
KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_SKIP_LEVEL2 = BIT(8),
KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_SKIP_LEVEL1 = BIT(9),
KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_SKIP_NEW_TABLE = BIT(10),
};
How does that sound?
Thanks!
Leo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-18 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-15 19:59 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Optimize S2 page splitting Leonardo Bras
2026-05-15 19:59 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm64: Introduce S2 walker SKIP return options Leonardo Bras
2026-05-18 7:22 ` Oliver Upton
2026-05-18 8:52 ` Will Deacon
2026-05-18 13:45 ` Leonardo Bras [this message]
2026-05-19 12:43 ` Will Deacon
2026-05-19 12:56 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-05-19 13:15 ` Will Deacon
2026-05-19 14:35 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-05-19 21:21 ` Oliver Upton
2026-05-15 19:59 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: Improve splitting performance by using SKIP return values Leonardo Bras
2026-05-16 9:15 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] Optimize S2 page splitting Marc Zyngier
2026-05-18 14:09 ` Leonardo Bras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=agsYF-Dav2bpxWK4@devkitleo \
--to=leo.bras@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=rananta@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tabba@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox