From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
To: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com,
"moderated list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR ARM64 (KVM/arm64)"
<kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR MIPS (KVM/mips)"
<linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR MIPS (KVM/mips)"
<kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR RISC-V (KVM/riscv)"
<kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 20/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend Eager Page Splitting to nested MMUs
Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 15:51:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <de48ed40-4e6e-c49d-426e-91aba4ce1337@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220422210546.458943-21-dmatlack@google.com>
On 2022/4/23 05:05, David Matlack wrote:
> Add support for Eager Page Splitting pages that are mapped by nested
> MMUs. Walk through the rmap first splitting all 1GiB pages to 2MiB
> pages, and then splitting all 2MiB pages to 4KiB pages.
>
> Note, Eager Page Splitting is limited to nested MMUs as a policy rather
> than due to any technical reason (the sp->role.guest_mode check could
> just be deleted and Eager Page Splitting would work correctly for all
> shadow MMU pages). There is really no reason to support Eager Page
> Splitting for tdp_mmu=N, since such support will eventually be phased
> out, and there is no current use case supporting Eager Page Splitting on
> hosts where TDP is either disabled or unavailable in hardware.
> Furthermore, future improvements to nested MMU scalability may diverge
> the code from the legacy shadow paging implementation. These
> improvements will be simpler to make if Eager Page Splitting does not
> have to worry about legacy shadow paging.
>
> Splitting huge pages mapped by nested MMUs requires dealing with some
> extra complexity beyond that of the TDP MMU:
>
> (1) The shadow MMU has a limit on the number of shadow pages that are
> allowed to be allocated. So, as a policy, Eager Page Splitting
> refuses to split if there are KVM_MIN_FREE_MMU_PAGES or fewer
> pages available.
>
> (2) Splitting a huge page may end up re-using an existing lower level
> shadow page tables. This is unlike the TDP MMU which always allocates
> new shadow page tables when splitting.
>
> (3) When installing the lower level SPTEs, they must be added to the
> rmap which may require allocating additional pte_list_desc structs.
>
> Case (2) is especially interesting since it may require a TLB flush,
> unlike the TDP MMU which can fully split huge pages without any TLB
> flushes. Specifically, an existing lower level page table may point to
> even lower level page tables that are not fully populated, effectively
> unmapping a portion of the huge page, which requires a flush.
>
> This commit performs such flushes after dropping the huge page and
> before installing the lower level page table. This TLB flush could
> instead be delayed until the MMU lock is about to be dropped, which
> would batch flushes for multiple splits. However these flushes should
> be rare in practice (a huge page must be aliased in multiple SPTEs and
> have been split for NX Huge Pages in only some of them). Flushing
> immediately is simpler to plumb and also reduces the chances of tripping
> over a CPU bug (e.g. see iTLB multihit).
>
> Suggested-by: Peter Feiner <pfeiner@google.com>
> [ This commit is based off of the original implementation of Eager Page
> Splitting from Peter in Google's kernel from 2016. ]
> Signed-off-by: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
> ---
> .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 3 +-
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 20 ++
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 276 +++++++++++++++++-
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 6 +
> 4 files changed, 296 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 3f1cc5e317ed..bc3ad3d4df0b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2387,8 +2387,7 @@
> the KVM_CLEAR_DIRTY ioctl, and only for the pages being
> cleared.
>
> - Eager page splitting currently only supports splitting
> - huge pages mapped by the TDP MMU.
> + Eager page splitting is only supported when kvm.tdp_mmu=Y.
>
> Default is Y (on).
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 15131aa05701..5df4dff385a1 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -1240,6 +1240,24 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> hpa_t hv_root_tdp;
> spinlock_t hv_root_tdp_lock;
> #endif
> +
> + /*
> + * Memory caches used to allocate shadow pages when performing eager
> + * page splitting. No need for a shadowed_info_cache since eager page
> + * splitting only allocates direct shadow pages.
> + */
> + struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache split_shadow_page_cache;
> + struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache split_page_header_cache;
> +
> + /*
> + * Memory cache used to allocate pte_list_desc structs while splitting
> + * huge pages. In the worst case, to split one huge page, 512
> + * pte_list_desc structs are needed to add each lower level leaf sptep
> + * to the rmap plus 1 to extend the parent_ptes rmap of the lower level
> + * page table.
> + */
> +#define SPLIT_DESC_CACHE_CAPACITY 513
> + struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache split_desc_cache;
> };
>
>
I think it needs to document that the topup operations for these caches are
protected by kvm->slots_lock.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-07 7:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-22 21:05 [PATCH v4 00/20] KVM: Extend Eager Page Splitting to the shadow MMU David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 01/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Optimize MMU page cache lookup for all direct SPs David Matlack
2022-05-07 7:46 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 02/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Use a bool for direct David Matlack
2022-05-07 7:46 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 03/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Derive shadow MMU page role from parent David Matlack
2022-05-05 21:50 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 22:10 ` David Matlack
2022-05-10 2:38 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-07 8:28 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-09 21:04 ` David Matlack
2022-05-10 2:58 ` Lai Jiangshan
2022-05-10 13:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-12 16:10 ` David Matlack
2022-05-13 18:26 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 04/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Decompose kvm_mmu_get_page() into separate functions David Matlack
2022-05-05 21:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 05/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Consolidate shadow page allocation and initialization David Matlack
2022-05-05 22:10 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 20:53 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 06/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Rename shadow MMU functions that deal with shadow pages David Matlack
2022-05-05 22:15 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 07/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Move guest PT write-protection to account_shadowed() David Matlack
2022-05-05 22:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:18 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 08/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass memory caches to allocate SPs separately David Matlack
2022-05-05 23:00 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 09/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Replace vcpu with kvm in kvm_mmu_alloc_shadow_page() David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 10/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass kvm pointer separately from vcpu to kvm_mmu_find_shadow_page() David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 11/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow for NULL vcpu pointer in __kvm_mmu_get_shadow_page() David Matlack
2022-05-05 23:33 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:26 ` David Matlack
2022-05-09 22:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 23:59 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 12/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Pass const memslot to rmap_add() David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 13/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Decouple rmap_add() and link_shadow_page() from kvm_vcpu David Matlack
2022-05-05 23:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:27 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 14/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Update page stats in __rmap_add() David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 15/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Cache the access bits of shadowed translations David Matlack
2022-05-06 19:47 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 16:10 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:29 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 16/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend make_huge_page_split_spte() for the shadow MMU David Matlack
2022-05-09 16:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:31 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 17/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Zap collapsible SPTEs at all levels in " David Matlack
2022-05-09 16:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:34 ` David Matlack
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 18/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Refactor drop_large_spte() David Matlack
2022-05-09 16:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 19/20] KVM: Allow for different capacities in kvm_mmu_memory_cache structs David Matlack
2022-04-23 8:08 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-24 15:21 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-22 21:05 ` [PATCH v4 20/20] KVM: x86/mmu: Extend Eager Page Splitting to nested MMUs David Matlack
2022-05-07 7:51 ` Lai Jiangshan [this message]
2022-05-09 21:40 ` David Matlack
2022-05-09 16:48 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-05-09 21:44 ` David Matlack
2022-05-09 22:47 ` Sean Christopherson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=de48ed40-4e6e-c49d-426e-91aba4ce1337@gmail.com \
--to=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com \
--cc=anup@brainfault.org \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=bgardon@google.com \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=pfeiner@google.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).