From: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
Subject: [PATCH] KVM: x86: optimize PKU branching in kvm_load_{guest|host}_xsave_state
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 20:44:39 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220324004439.6709-1-jon@nutanix.com> (raw)
kvm_load_{guest|host}_xsave_state handles xsave on vm entry and exit,
part of which is managing memory protection key state. The latest
arch.pkru is updated with a rdpkru, and if that doesn't match the base
host_pkru (which about 70% of the time), we issue a __write_pkru.
To improve performance, implement the following optimizations:
1. Reorder if conditions prior to wrpkru in both
kvm_load_{guest|host}_xsave_state.
Flip the ordering of the || condition so that XFEATURE_MASK_PKRU is
checked first, which when instrumented in our environment appeared
to be always true and less overall work than kvm_read_cr4_bits.
For kvm_load_guest_xsave_state, hoist arch.pkru != host_pkru ahead
one position. When instrumented, I saw this be true roughly ~70% of
the time vs the other conditions which were almost always true.
With this change, we will avoid 3rd condition check ~30% of the time.
2. Wrap PKU sections with CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS,
as if the user compiles out this feature, we should not have
these branches at all.
Signed-off-by: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 14 +++++++++-----
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index 6db3a506b402..2b00123a5d50 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -950,11 +950,13 @@ void kvm_load_guest_xsave_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_XSS, vcpu->arch.ia32_xss);
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PKU) &&
- (kvm_read_cr4_bits(vcpu, X86_CR4_PKE) ||
- (vcpu->arch.xcr0 & XFEATURE_MASK_PKRU)) &&
- vcpu->arch.pkru != vcpu->arch.host_pkru)
+ vcpu->arch.pkru != vcpu->arch.host_pkru &&
+ ((vcpu->arch.xcr0 & XFEATURE_MASK_PKRU) ||
+ kvm_read_cr4_bits(vcpu, X86_CR4_PKE)))
write_pkru(vcpu->arch.pkru);
+#endif /* CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS */
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_load_guest_xsave_state);
@@ -963,13 +965,15 @@ void kvm_load_host_xsave_state(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
if (vcpu->arch.guest_state_protected)
return;
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PKU) &&
- (kvm_read_cr4_bits(vcpu, X86_CR4_PKE) ||
- (vcpu->arch.xcr0 & XFEATURE_MASK_PKRU))) {
+ ((vcpu->arch.xcr0 & XFEATURE_MASK_PKRU) ||
+ kvm_read_cr4_bits(vcpu, X86_CR4_PKE))) {
vcpu->arch.pkru = rdpkru();
if (vcpu->arch.pkru != vcpu->arch.host_pkru)
write_pkru(vcpu->arch.host_pkru);
}
+#endif /* CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS */
if (kvm_read_cr4_bits(vcpu, X86_CR4_OSXSAVE)) {
--
2.30.1 (Apple Git-130)
next reply other threads:[~2022-03-24 0:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-24 0:44 Jon Kohler [this message]
2022-03-25 11:01 ` [PATCH] KVM: x86: optimize PKU branching in kvm_load_{guest|host}_xsave_state Paolo Bonzini
2022-03-26 0:15 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-03-26 1:37 ` Jon Kohler
2022-03-27 10:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-03-28 0:53 ` Jon Kohler
2022-03-28 14:51 ` 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=20220324004439.6709-1-jon@nutanix.com \
--to=jon@nutanix.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
--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