From: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Gabriel L. Somlo" <gsomlo@gmail.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:58:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170314135823.GA5432@potion> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1489448438-29865-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
2017-03-14 01:44+0200, Michael S. Tsirkin:
> Guests running Mac OS 5, 6, and 7 (Leopard through Lion) have a problem:
> unless explicitly provided with kernel command line argument
> "idlehalt=0" they'd implicitly assume MONITOR and MWAIT availability,
> without checking CPUID.
>
> We currently emulate that as a NOP but on VMX we can do better: let
> guest stop the CPU until timer, IPI or memory change. CPU will be busy
> but that isn't any worse than a NOP emulation.
>
> Note that mwait within guests is not the same as on real hardware
> because halt causes an exit while mwait doesn't. For this reason it
> might not be a good idea to use the regular MWAIT flag in CPUID to
> signal this capability. Add a flag in the hypervisor leaf instead.
>
> Additionally, we add a capability for QEMU - e.g. if it knows there's an
> isolated CPU dedicated for the VCPU it can set the standard MWAIT flag
> to improve guest behaviour.
>
> Reported-by: "Gabriel L. Somlo" <gsomlo@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> Note: SVM bits are untested at this point. Seems pretty
> obvious though.
>
> changes from v2:
> - add a capability to allow host userspace to detect new kernels
> - more documentation to clarify the semantics of the feature flag
> and why it's useful
> - svm support as suggested by Radim
>
> changes from v1:
> - typo fix resulting in rest of leaf flags being overwritten
> Reported by: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
> - updated commit log with data about guests helped by this feature
> - better document differences between mwait and halt for guests
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> @@ -4135,11 +4135,11 @@ available, means that that the kernel can support guests using the
> radix MMU defined in Power ISA V3.00 (as implemented in the POWER9
> processor).
>
> -8.4 KVM_CAP_PPC_HASH_MMU_V3
This patch should not not remove the PPC capability from docs.
(The right name is KVM_CAP_PPC_HASH_V3, but that is for another patch.)
> +8.5 KVM_CAP_X86_GUEST_MWAIT
>
> -Architectures: ppc
> +Architectures: x86
>
> -This capability, if KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION indicates that it is
> -available, means that that the kernel can support guests using the
> -hashed page table MMU defined in Power ISA V3.00 (as implemented in
> -the POWER9 processor), including in-memory segment tables.
> +This capability indicates that guest using memory monotoring instructions
> +(MWAIT/MWAITX) to stop the virtual CPU will not cause a VM exit. As such time
> +spent while virtual CPU is halted in this way will then be accounted for as
> +guest running time on the host (as opposed to e.g. HLT).
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -2684,6 +2684,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
> case KVM_CAP_ADJUST_CLOCK:
> r = KVM_CLOCK_TSC_STABLE;
> break;
> + case KVM_CAP_X86_GUEST_MWAIT:
> + r = !!this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MWAIT);
this_cpu_has already returns bool, so !! is not needed.
I can fix both while applying.
> + break;
> case KVM_CAP_X86_SMM:
> /* SMBASE is usually relocated above 1M on modern chipsets,
> * and SMM handlers might indeed rely on 4G segment limits,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-14 13:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-13 23:44 [PATCH v3] kvm: better MWAIT emulation for guests Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-03-14 13:58 ` Radim Krčmář [this message]
2017-03-14 15:34 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20170314135823.GA5432@potion \
--to=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=gsomlo@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@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