From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
avi.kivity@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] KVM: MMU: fast invalid all shadow pages
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 11:58:48 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130507085848.GI12349@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5187EC50.4030308@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 01:45:52AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 05/07/2013 01:24 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:10:11PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> On 05/06/2013 08:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> Step 1) Fix kvm_mmu_zap_all's behaviour: introduce lockbreak via
> >>>>> spin_needbreak. Use generation numbers so that in case kvm_mmu_zap_all
> >>>>> releases mmu_lock and reacquires it again, only shadow pages
> >>>>> from the generation with which kvm_mmu_zap_all started are zapped (this
> >>>>> guarantees forward progress and eventual termination).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> kvm_mmu_zap_generation()
> >>>>> spin_lock(mmu_lock)
> >>>>> int generation = kvm->arch.mmu_generation;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> for_each_shadow_page(sp) {
> >>>>> if (sp->generation == kvm->arch.mmu_generation)
> >>>>> zap_page(sp)
> >>>>> if (spin_needbreak(mmu_lock)) {
> >>>>> kvm->arch.mmu_generation++;
> >>>>> cond_resched_lock(mmu_lock);
> >>>>> }
> >>>>> }
> >>>>>
> >>>>> kvm_mmu_zap_all()
> >>>>> spin_lock(mmu_lock)
> >>>>> for_each_shadow_page(sp) {
> >>>>> if (spin_needbreak(mmu_lock)) {
> >>>>> cond_resched_lock(mmu_lock);
> >>>>> }
> >>>>> }
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Use kvm_mmu_zap_generation for kvm_arch_flush_shadow_memslot.
> >>>>> Use kvm_mmu_zap_all for kvm_mmu_notifier_release,kvm_destroy_vm.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This addresses the main problem: excessively long hold times
> >>>>> of kvm_mmu_zap_all with very large guests.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do you see any problem with this logic? This was what i was thinking
> >>>>> we agreed.
> >>>>
> >>>> No. I understand it and it can work.
> >>>>
> >>>> Actually, it is similar with Gleb's idea that "zapping stale shadow pages
> >>>> (and uses lock break technique)", after some discussion, we thought "only zap
> >>>> shadow pages that are reachable from the slot's rmap" is better, that is this
> >>>> patchset does.
> >>>> (https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/23/73)
> >>>>
> >>> But this is not what the patch is doing. Close, but not the same :)
> >>
> >> Okay. :)
> >>
> >>> Instead of zapping shadow pages reachable from slot's rmap the patch
> >>> does kvm_unmap_rmapp() which drop all spte without zapping shadow pages.
> >>> That is why you need special code to re-init lpage_info. What I proposed
> >>> was to call zap_page() on all shadow pages reachable from rmap. This
> >>> will take care of lpage_info counters. Does this make sense?
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, no! We still need to care lpage_info. lpage_info is used
> >> to count the number of guest page tables in the memslot.
> >>
> >> For example, there is a memslot:
> >> memslot[0].based_gfn = 0, memslot[0].npages = 100,
> >>
> >> and there is a shadow page:
> >> sp->role.direct =0, sp->role.level = 4, sp->gfn = 10.
> >>
> >> this sp is counted in the memslot[0] but it can not be found by walking
> >> memslot[0]->rmap since there is no last mapping in this shadow page.
> >>
> > Right, so what about walking mmu_page_hash for each gfn belonging to the
> > slot that is in process to be removed to find those?
>
> That will cost lots of time. The size of hashtable is 1 << 10. If the
> memslot has 4M memory, it will walk all the entries, the cost is the same
> as walking active_list (maybe litter more). And a memslot has 4M memory is
> the normal case i think.
>
Memslots will be much bigger with memory hotplug. Lock break should be
used while walking mmu_page_hash obviously, but still iterating over
entire memslot gfn space to find a few gfn that may be there is
suboptimal. We can keep a list of them in the memslot itself.
> Another point is that lpage_info stops mmu to use large page. If we
> do not reset lpage_info, mmu is using 4K page until the invalid-sp is
> zapped.
>
I do not think this is a big issue. If lpage_info prevented the use of
large pages for some memory ranges before we zapped entire shadow pages
it was probably for a reason, so new shadow page will prevent large
pages from been created for the same memory ranges.
--
Gleb.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-07 8:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-27 3:13 [PATCH v4 0/6] KVM: MMU: fast zap all shadow pages Xiao Guangrong
2013-04-27 3:13 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] KVM: MMU: drop unnecessary kvm_reload_remote_mmus Xiao Guangrong
2013-04-27 3:13 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] KVM: x86: introduce memslot_set_lpage_disallowed Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-03 2:10 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2013-05-03 5:55 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-04-27 3:13 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] KVM: MMU: introduce kvm_clear_all_lpage_info Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-03 2:15 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2013-05-03 5:57 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-04-27 3:13 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] KVM: MMU: fast invalid all shadow pages Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-03 1:05 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-05-03 5:52 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-03 15:53 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-05-03 16:51 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-04 0:52 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-05-04 0:56 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-05-06 3:39 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-06 12:36 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-05-06 13:10 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-06 17:24 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-05-06 17:45 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-07 8:58 ` Gleb Natapov [this message]
2013-05-07 9:41 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-07 10:00 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-05-07 14:33 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-05-07 14:56 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-05-07 15:09 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-05-08 10:41 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-05-06 19:50 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-05-07 3:39 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-05-07 14:42 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2013-05-03 2:27 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2013-05-03 6:00 ` Xiao Guangrong
2013-04-27 3:13 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] KVM: x86: use the fast way to invalid all pages Xiao Guangrong
2013-04-27 3:13 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] KVM: MMU: make kvm_mmu_zap_all preemptable Xiao Guangrong
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=20130507085848.GI12349@redhat.com \
--to=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=avi.kivity@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com \
--cc=xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.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).