Re: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: x86/mmu: .change_pte() optimization in TDP MMU

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>]

On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 05:18:51PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Indeed a bunch of work has gone into SWIOTLB recently trying to make it a 
> bit more efficient for such cases where it can't be avoided, so it is 
> definitely still interesting to learn about impacts at other levels like 
> this. Maybe there's a bit of a get-out for confidential VMs though, since 
> presumably there's not much point COW-ing encrypted private memory, so 
> perhaps KVM might end up wanting to optimise that out and thus happen to 
> end up less sensitive to unavoidable SWIOTLB behaviour anyway?

Well, the fix for bounce buffering is to trust the device, and there is
a lot of work going into device authentication and attesttion right now
so that will happen.

On the swiotlb side a new version of the dma_sync_*_device APIs that
specifies the mapping len and the data length transfer would avoid
some of the overhead here.  We've decided that it is a good idea last
time, but so far no one has volunteers to implement it.