From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: "Longpeng(Mike)" <longpeng2@huawei.com>,
dwmw2@infradead.org, will@kernel.org, joro@8bytes.org
Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, arei.gonglei@huawei.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] iommu/vt-d: avoid duplicated removing in __domain_mapping
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:43:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1e83751f-5731-5786-c7d7-899542d7c2b7@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54cf3663-85e0-3e63-9112-385e9d6eeceb@linux.intel.com>
On 10/8/21 10:07 AM, Lu Baolu wrote:
> On 10/8/21 8:04 AM, Longpeng(Mike) wrote:
>> __domain_mapping() always removes the pages in the range from
>> 'iov_pfn' to 'end_pfn', but the 'end_pfn' is always the last pfn
>> of the range that the caller wants to map.
>>
>> This would introduce too many duplicated removing and leads the
>> map operation take too long, for example:
>>
>> Map iova=0x100000,nr_pages=0x7d61800
>> iov_pfn: 0x100000, end_pfn: 0x7e617ff
>> iov_pfn: 0x140000, end_pfn: 0x7e617ff
>> iov_pfn: 0x180000, end_pfn: 0x7e617ff
>> iov_pfn: 0x1c0000, end_pfn: 0x7e617ff
>> iov_pfn: 0x200000, end_pfn: 0x7e617ff
>> ...
>> it takes about 50ms in total.
>>
>> We can reduce the cost by recalculate the 'end_pfn' and limit it
>> to the boundary of the end of this pte page.
>>
>> Map iova=0x100000,nr_pages=0x7d61800
>> iov_pfn: 0x100000, end_pfn: 0x13ffff
>> iov_pfn: 0x140000, end_pfn: 0x17ffff
>> iov_pfn: 0x180000, end_pfn: 0x1bffff
>> iov_pfn: 0x1c0000, end_pfn: 0x1fffff
>> iov_pfn: 0x200000, end_pfn: 0x23ffff
>> ...
>> it only need 9ms now.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Longpeng(Mike) <longpeng2@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c | 11 ++++++-----
>> include/linux/intel-iommu.h | 6 ++++++
>> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
>> index d75f59a..46edae6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/iommu.c
>> @@ -2354,12 +2354,17 @@ static void switch_to_super_page(struct
>> dmar_domain *domain,
>> return -ENOMEM;
>> first_pte = pte;
>> + lvl_pages = lvl_to_nr_pages(largepage_lvl);
>> +
>> /* It is large page*/
>> if (largepage_lvl > 1) {
>> unsigned long end_pfn;
>> + unsigned long pages_to_remove;
>> pteval |= DMA_PTE_LARGE_PAGE;
>> - end_pfn = ((iov_pfn + nr_pages) &
>> level_mask(largepage_lvl)) - 1;
>> + pages_to_remove = min_t(unsigned long, nr_pages,
>> + nr_pte_to_next_page(pte) * lvl_pages);
>> + end_pfn = iov_pfn + pages_to_remove - 1;
>> switch_to_super_page(domain, iov_pfn, end_pfn,
>> largepage_lvl);
>> } else {
>> pteval &= ~(uint64_t)DMA_PTE_LARGE_PAGE;
>> @@ -2381,10 +2386,6 @@ static void switch_to_super_page(struct
>> dmar_domain *domain,
>> WARN_ON(1);
>> }
>> - lvl_pages = lvl_to_nr_pages(largepage_lvl);
>> -
>> - BUG_ON(nr_pages < lvl_pages);
>> -
>> nr_pages -= lvl_pages;
>> iov_pfn += lvl_pages;
>> phys_pfn += lvl_pages;
>> diff --git a/include/linux/intel-iommu.h b/include/linux/intel-iommu.h
>> index 9bcabc7..b29b2a3 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/intel-iommu.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/intel-iommu.h
>> @@ -713,6 +713,12 @@ static inline bool first_pte_in_page(struct
>> dma_pte *pte)
>> return IS_ALIGNED((unsigned long)pte, VTD_PAGE_SIZE);
>> }
>> +static inline int nr_pte_to_next_page(struct dma_pte *pte)
>> +{
>> + return first_pte_in_page(pte) ? BIT_ULL(VTD_STRIDE_SHIFT) :
>> + (struct dma_pte *)ALIGN((unsigned long)pte, VTD_PAGE_SIZE) -
>> pte;
>
> We should make it like this to avoid the 0day warning:
>
> (struct dma_pte *)(uintptr_t)VTD_PAGE_ALIGN((unsigned long)pte) - pte;
>
> Can you please test this line of change? No need to send a new version.
> I will handle it if it passes your test.
Just realized that ALIGN() has already done the type cast. Please ignore
above comment. Sorry for the noise.
Best regards,
baolu
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-08 2:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-08 0:04 [PATCH v3 0/2] iommu/vt-d: boost the mapping process Longpeng(Mike)
2021-10-08 0:04 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] iommu/vt-d: convert the return type of first_pte_in_page to bool Longpeng(Mike)
2021-10-08 0:04 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] iommu/vt-d: avoid duplicated removing in __domain_mapping Longpeng(Mike)
2021-10-08 2:07 ` Lu Baolu
2021-10-08 2:43 ` Lu Baolu [this message]
2021-10-08 6:34 ` Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.)
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=1e83751f-5731-5786-c7d7-899542d7c2b7@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arei.gonglei@huawei.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longpeng2@huawei.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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