linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa_takuya_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
	Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Alleviate mmu_lock hold time when we start dirty logging
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 06:24:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1356096270.3625.37.camel@ul30vt.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121221085404.GQ29007@redhat.com>

On Fri, 2012-12-21 at 10:54 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 05:02:50PM +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:55:43 -0700
> > Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Yes, the fix should work, but I do not want to update the
> > > > generation from outside of update_memslots().
> > > 
> > > Ok, then:
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> > > index 87089dd..c7b5061 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> > > @@ -413,7 +413,8 @@ void kvm_exit(void);
> > >  
> > >  void kvm_get_kvm(struct kvm *kvm);
> > >  void kvm_put_kvm(struct kvm *kvm);
> > > -void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot *new);
> > > +void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot *new,
> > > +                     u64 last_generation);
> > >  
> > >  static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)
> > >  {
> > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > > index c4c8ec1..06961ea 100644
> > > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > > @@ -667,7 +667,8 @@ static void sort_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots)
> > >  		slots->id_to_index[slots->memslots[i].id] = i;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot *new)
> > > +void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot *new,
> > > +                     u64 last_generation)
> > >  {
> > >  	if (new) {
> > >  		int id = new->id;
> > > @@ -679,7 +680,7 @@ void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot *new)
> > >  			sort_memslots(slots);
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > > -	slots->generation++;
> > > +	slots->generation = last_generation + 1;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  static int check_memory_region_flags(struct kvm_userspace_memory_region *mem)
> > > @@ -814,7 +815,7 @@ int __kvm_set_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm,
> > >  		slot = id_to_memslot(slots, mem->slot);
> > >  		slot->flags |= KVM_MEMSLOT_INVALID;
> > >  
> > > -		update_memslots(slots, NULL);
> > > +		update_memslots(slots, NULL, kvm->memslots->generation);
> > >  
> > >  		old_memslots = kvm->memslots;
> > >  		rcu_assign_pointer(kvm->memslots, slots);
> > > @@ -862,7 +863,7 @@ int __kvm_set_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm,
> > >  		memset(&new.arch, 0, sizeof(new.arch));
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > > -	update_memslots(slots, &new);
> > > +	update_memslots(slots, &new, kvm->memslots->generation);
> > >  	old_memslots = kvm->memslots;
> > >  	rcu_assign_pointer(kvm->memslots, slots);
> > >  	synchronize_srcu_expedited(&kvm->srcu);
> > > 
> > > > > The original patch can be reverted, there are no following dependencies,
> > > > > but the idea was that we're making the memslot array larger, so there
> > > > > could be more pressure in allocating it, so let's not trivially do extra
> > > > > frees and allocs.  Thanks,
> > > > 
> > > > I agree that the current set_memory_region() is not good for frequent updates.
> > > > But the alloc/free is not a major factor at the moment: flushing shadows should
> > > > be more problematic.
> > > 
> > > I don't understand why we'd throw away even a minor optimization that's
> > > so easy to fix.  We're not only removing a free/alloc, but we're being
> > > more friendly to the cache by avoiding the extra memcpy.  The above also
> > > makes the generation management a bit more explicit.  Thanks,
> > 
> > Looks good to me!
> > 
> Me too.
> 
> > I just wanted to keep the code readable, so no reason to object to
> > a clean solution.  Any chance to see the fix on kvm.git soon?
> > 
> Soon after Alex will send proper patch with Signed-off-by.

I'll test and do that first thing today, thanks,

Alex


  reply	other threads:[~2012-12-21 13:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-12-18  7:25 [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Alleviate mmu_lock hold time when we start dirty logging Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-18  7:26 ` [PATCH 1/7] KVM: Write protect the updated slot only " Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-24 13:27   ` Gleb Natapov
2012-12-25  4:08     ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-25  5:05       ` Gleb Natapov
2012-12-25  5:26         ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2013-01-07 20:11   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-01-08 11:50     ` Gleb Natapov
2012-12-18  7:27 ` [PATCH 2/7] KVM: MMU: Remove unused parameter level from __rmap_write_protect() Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-18  7:28 ` [PATCH 3/7] KVM: MMU: Make kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access() rmap based Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-18  7:28 ` [PATCH 4/7] KVM: x86: Remove unused slot_bitmap from kvm_mmu_page Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-18  7:29 ` [PATCH 5/7] KVM: Make kvm_mmu_change_mmu_pages() take mmu_lock by itself Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-18  7:30 ` [PATCH 6/7] KVM: Make kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access() " Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-18  7:30 ` [PATCH 7/7] KVM: Conditionally reschedule when kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access() takes a long time Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-19 12:30 ` [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Alleviate mmu_lock hold time when we start dirty logging Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-19 15:42   ` Alex Williamson
2012-12-20  5:02     ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-20 12:59       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-12-20 13:22         ` Gleb Natapov
2012-12-20 13:41           ` Alex Williamson
2012-12-20 14:35             ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-20 14:55               ` Alex Williamson
2012-12-21  8:02                 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-12-21  8:54                   ` Gleb Natapov
2012-12-21 13:24                     ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2012-12-21  8:05                 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2013-01-07 20:36 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-01-08 10:40   ` Takuya Yoshikawa

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=1356096270.3625.37.camel@ul30vt.home \
    --to=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com \
    --cc=yoshikawa_takuya_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    /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).