* [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote()
2025-06-20 3:23 [PATCH v5 0/3] vfio/type1: optimize vfio_unpin_pages_remote() for large folio lizhe.67
@ 2025-06-20 3:23 ` lizhe.67
2025-06-24 16:23 ` kernel test robot
2025-06-27 21:40 ` Alex Williamson
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] vfio/type1: introduce a new member has_rsvd for struct vfio_dma lizhe.67
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] vfio/type1: optimize vfio_unpin_pages_remote() for large folio lizhe.67
2 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: lizhe.67 @ 2025-06-20 3:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: alex.williamson, jgg, david; +Cc: peterx, kvm, linux-kernel, lizhe.67
From: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
This patch is based on patch 'vfio/type1: optimize
vfio_pin_pages_remote() for large folios'[1].
The function vpfn_pages() can help us determine the number of vpfn
nodes on the vpfn rb tree within a specified range. This allows us
to avoid searching for each vpfn individually in the function
vfio_unpin_pages_remote(). This patch batches the vfio_find_vpfn()
calls in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote().
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250529064947.38433-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com/
Signed-off-by: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
---
drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 10 +++-------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
index 28ee4b8d39ae..e952bf8bdfab 100644
--- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
+++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
@@ -805,16 +805,12 @@ static long vfio_unpin_pages_remote(struct vfio_dma *dma, dma_addr_t iova,
unsigned long pfn, unsigned long npage,
bool do_accounting)
{
- long unlocked = 0, locked = 0;
+ long unlocked = 0, locked = vpfn_pages(dma, iova, npage);
long i;
- for (i = 0; i < npage; i++, iova += PAGE_SIZE) {
- if (put_pfn(pfn++, dma->prot)) {
+ for (i = 0; i < npage; i++)
+ if (put_pfn(pfn++, dma->prot))
unlocked++;
- if (vfio_find_vpfn(dma, iova))
- locked++;
- }
- }
if (do_accounting)
vfio_lock_acct(dma, locked - unlocked, true);
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote()
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote() lizhe.67
@ 2025-06-24 16:23 ` kernel test robot
2025-06-25 2:29 ` lizhe.67
2025-06-27 21:40 ` Alex Williamson
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2025-06-24 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lizhe.67, alex.williamson, jgg, david
Cc: oe-kbuild-all, peterx, kvm, linux-kernel, lizhe.67
Hi,
kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on awilliam-vfio/next]
[also build test ERROR on awilliam-vfio/for-linus linus/master v6.16-rc3 next-20250624]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/lizhe-67-bytedance-com/vfio-type1-batch-vfio_find_vpfn-in-function-vfio_unpin_pages_remote/20250620-112605
base: https://github.com/awilliam/linux-vfio.git next
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250620032344.13382-2-lizhe.67%40bytedance.com
patch subject: [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote()
config: x86_64-rhel-9.4 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250625/202506250037.VfdBAPP3-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250625/202506250037.VfdBAPP3-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202506250037.VfdBAPP3-lkp@intel.com/
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c: In function 'vfio_unpin_pages_remote':
>> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c:738:37: error: implicit declaration of function 'vpfn_pages'; did you mean 'vma_pages'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
738 | long unlocked = 0, locked = vpfn_pages(dma, iova, npage);
| ^~~~~~~~~~
| vma_pages
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
vim +738 drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
733
734 static long vfio_unpin_pages_remote(struct vfio_dma *dma, dma_addr_t iova,
735 unsigned long pfn, unsigned long npage,
736 bool do_accounting)
737 {
> 738 long unlocked = 0, locked = vpfn_pages(dma, iova, npage);
739 long i;
740
741 for (i = 0; i < npage; i++)
742 if (put_pfn(pfn++, dma->prot))
743 unlocked++;
744
745 if (do_accounting)
746 vfio_lock_acct(dma, locked - unlocked, true);
747
748 return unlocked;
749 }
750
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote()
2025-06-24 16:23 ` kernel test robot
@ 2025-06-25 2:29 ` lizhe.67
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: lizhe.67 @ 2025-06-25 2:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lkp
Cc: alex.williamson, david, jgg, kvm, linux-kernel, lizhe.67,
oe-kbuild-all, peterx
On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 00:23:03 +0800,
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
> kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
>
> [auto build test ERROR on awilliam-vfio/next]
> [also build test ERROR on awilliam-vfio/for-linus linus/master v6.16-rc3 next-20250624]
> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
>
> url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/lizhe-67-bytedance-com/vfio-type1-batch-vfio_find_vpfn-in-function-vfio_unpin_pages_remote/20250620-112605
> base: https://github.com/awilliam/linux-vfio.git next
> patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250620032344.13382-2-lizhe.67%40bytedance.com
> patch subject: [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote()
> config: x86_64-rhel-9.4 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250625/202506250037.VfdBAPP3-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250625/202506250037.VfdBAPP3-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
>
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202506250037.VfdBAPP3-lkp@intel.com/
>
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c: In function 'vfio_unpin_pages_remote':
> >> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c:738:37: error: implicit declaration of function 'vpfn_pages'; did you mean 'vma_pages'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 738 | long unlocked = 0, locked = vpfn_pages(dma, iova, npage);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~
> | vma_pages
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
Perhaps we need to compile with this patch[1] included to avoid build
errors.
Thanks,
Zhe
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250529064947.38433-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote()
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote() lizhe.67
2025-06-24 16:23 ` kernel test robot
@ 2025-06-27 21:40 ` Alex Williamson
2025-06-30 2:45 ` lizhe.67
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Alex Williamson @ 2025-06-27 21:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lizhe.67; +Cc: jgg, david, peterx, kvm, linux-kernel
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 11:23:42 +0800
lizhe.67@bytedance.com wrote:
> From: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
>
> This patch is based on patch 'vfio/type1: optimize
> vfio_pin_pages_remote() for large folios'[1].
The above and the below link are only necessary in the cover letter, or
below the --- marker below, they don't really make sense in the
committed log.
Anyway, aside from that and one nit on 2/ (sent separately), the series
looks ok to me and I hope David and Jason will chime in with A-b/R-b
give the previous discussions.
Given the build bot error[1] I'd suggest resending all your work in a
single series, the previous map optimization and the unmap optimization
here. That way the dependency is already included, and it's a good
nudge for acks. Thanks,
Alex
[1]https://lore.kernel.org/all/202506250037.VfdBAPP3-lkp@intel.com/
>
> The function vpfn_pages() can help us determine the number of vpfn
> nodes on the vpfn rb tree within a specified range. This allows us
> to avoid searching for each vpfn individually in the function
> vfio_unpin_pages_remote(). This patch batches the vfio_find_vpfn()
> calls in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote().
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250529064947.38433-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com/
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 10 +++-------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> index 28ee4b8d39ae..e952bf8bdfab 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> @@ -805,16 +805,12 @@ static long vfio_unpin_pages_remote(struct vfio_dma *dma, dma_addr_t iova,
> unsigned long pfn, unsigned long npage,
> bool do_accounting)
> {
> - long unlocked = 0, locked = 0;
> + long unlocked = 0, locked = vpfn_pages(dma, iova, npage);
> long i;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < npage; i++, iova += PAGE_SIZE) {
> - if (put_pfn(pfn++, dma->prot)) {
> + for (i = 0; i < npage; i++)
> + if (put_pfn(pfn++, dma->prot))
> unlocked++;
> - if (vfio_find_vpfn(dma, iova))
> - locked++;
> - }
> - }
>
> if (do_accounting)
> vfio_lock_acct(dma, locked - unlocked, true);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote()
2025-06-27 21:40 ` Alex Williamson
@ 2025-06-30 2:45 ` lizhe.67
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: lizhe.67 @ 2025-06-30 2:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: alex.williamson; +Cc: david, jgg, kvm, linux-kernel, lizhe.67, peterx
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 15:40:59 -0600, alex.williamson@redhat.com wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 11:23:42 +0800
> lizhe.67@bytedance.com wrote:
>
> > From: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
> >
> > This patch is based on patch 'vfio/type1: optimize
> > vfio_pin_pages_remote() for large folios'[1].
>
> The above and the below link are only necessary in the cover letter, or
> below the --- marker below, they don't really make sense in the
> committed log.
>
> Anyway, aside from that and one nit on 2/ (sent separately), the series
> looks ok to me and I hope David and Jason will chime in with A-b/R-b
> give the previous discussions.
>
> Given the build bot error[1] I'd suggest resending all your work in a
> single series, the previous map optimization and the unmap optimization
> here. That way the dependency is already included, and it's a good
> nudge for acks. Thanks,
Thank you for your review. I will send a new patchset that includes
the latest optimizations for both map and unmap.
Thanks,
Zhe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v5 2/3] vfio/type1: introduce a new member has_rsvd for struct vfio_dma
2025-06-20 3:23 [PATCH v5 0/3] vfio/type1: optimize vfio_unpin_pages_remote() for large folio lizhe.67
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote() lizhe.67
@ 2025-06-20 3:23 ` lizhe.67
2025-06-27 21:40 ` Alex Williamson
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] vfio/type1: optimize vfio_unpin_pages_remote() for large folio lizhe.67
2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: lizhe.67 @ 2025-06-20 3:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: alex.williamson, jgg, david; +Cc: peterx, kvm, linux-kernel, lizhe.67
From: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
Introduce a new member has_rsvd for struct vfio_dma. This member is
used to indicate whether there are any reserved or invalid pfns in
the region represented by this vfio_dma. If it is true, it indicates
that there is at least one pfn in this region that is either reserved
or invalid.
Signed-off-by: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
---
drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
index e952bf8bdfab..8827e315e3d8 100644
--- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
+++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
@@ -93,6 +93,10 @@ struct vfio_dma {
bool iommu_mapped;
bool lock_cap; /* capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK) */
bool vaddr_invalid;
+ /*
+ * Any reserved or invalid pfns within this range?
+ */
+ bool has_rsvd;
struct task_struct *task;
struct rb_root pfn_list; /* Ex-user pinned pfn list */
unsigned long *bitmap;
@@ -785,6 +789,7 @@ static long vfio_pin_pages_remote(struct vfio_dma *dma, unsigned long vaddr,
}
out:
+ dma->has_rsvd |= rsvd;
ret = vfio_lock_acct(dma, lock_acct, false);
unpin_out:
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] vfio/type1: introduce a new member has_rsvd for struct vfio_dma
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] vfio/type1: introduce a new member has_rsvd for struct vfio_dma lizhe.67
@ 2025-06-27 21:40 ` Alex Williamson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Alex Williamson @ 2025-06-27 21:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lizhe.67; +Cc: jgg, david, peterx, kvm, linux-kernel
On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 11:23:43 +0800
lizhe.67@bytedance.com wrote:
> From: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
>
> Introduce a new member has_rsvd for struct vfio_dma. This member is
> used to indicate whether there are any reserved or invalid pfns in
> the region represented by this vfio_dma. If it is true, it indicates
> that there is at least one pfn in this region that is either reserved
> or invalid.
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> index e952bf8bdfab..8827e315e3d8 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
> @@ -93,6 +93,10 @@ struct vfio_dma {
> bool iommu_mapped;
> bool lock_cap; /* capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK) */
> bool vaddr_invalid;
> + /*
> + * Any reserved or invalid pfns within this range?
> + */
> + bool has_rsvd;
Nit, the topic isn't so complex to make a brief comment:
bool has_rsvd; /* has 1 or more rsvd pfns */
Thanks,
Alex
> struct task_struct *task;
> struct rb_root pfn_list; /* Ex-user pinned pfn list */
> unsigned long *bitmap;
> @@ -785,6 +789,7 @@ static long vfio_pin_pages_remote(struct vfio_dma *dma, unsigned long vaddr,
> }
>
> out:
> + dma->has_rsvd |= rsvd;
> ret = vfio_lock_acct(dma, lock_acct, false);
>
> unpin_out:
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v5 3/3] vfio/type1: optimize vfio_unpin_pages_remote() for large folio
2025-06-20 3:23 [PATCH v5 0/3] vfio/type1: optimize vfio_unpin_pages_remote() for large folio lizhe.67
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] vfio/type1: batch vfio_find_vpfn() in function vfio_unpin_pages_remote() lizhe.67
2025-06-20 3:23 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] vfio/type1: introduce a new member has_rsvd for struct vfio_dma lizhe.67
@ 2025-06-20 3:23 ` lizhe.67
2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: lizhe.67 @ 2025-06-20 3:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: alex.williamson, jgg, david; +Cc: peterx, kvm, linux-kernel, lizhe.67
From: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
When vfio_unpin_pages_remote() is called with a range of addresses that
includes large folios, the function currently performs individual
put_pfn() operations for each page. This can lead to significant
performance overheads, especially when dealing with large ranges of pages.
It would be very rare for reserved PFNs and non reserved will to be mixed
within the same range. So this patch utilizes the has_rsvd variable
introduced in the previous patch to determine whether batch put_pfn()
operations can be performed. Moreover, compared to put_pfn(),
unpin_user_page_range_dirty_lock() is capable of handling large folio
scenarios more efficiently.
The performance test results, based on v6.15, for completing the 16G VFIO
IOMMU DMA unmapping, obtained through unit test[1] with slight
modifications[2], are as follows.
Base(v6.15):
./vfio-pci-mem-dma-map 0000:03:00.0 16
------- AVERAGE (MADV_HUGEPAGE) --------
VFIO MAP DMA in 0.047 s (338.6 GB/s)
VFIO UNMAP DMA in 0.138 s (116.2 GB/s)
------- AVERAGE (MAP_POPULATE) --------
VFIO MAP DMA in 0.280 s (57.2 GB/s)
VFIO UNMAP DMA in 0.312 s (51.3 GB/s)
------- AVERAGE (HUGETLBFS) --------
VFIO MAP DMA in 0.052 s (308.3 GB/s)
VFIO UNMAP DMA in 0.139 s (115.1 GB/s)
Map[3] + This patchset:
------- AVERAGE (MADV_HUGEPAGE) --------
VFIO MAP DMA in 0.028 s (563.9 GB/s)
VFIO UNMAP DMA in 0.049 s (325.1 GB/s)
------- AVERAGE (MAP_POPULATE) --------
VFIO MAP DMA in 0.292 s (54.7 GB/s)
VFIO UNMAP DMA in 0.292 s (54.9 GB/s)
------- AVERAGE (HUGETLBFS) --------
VFIO MAP DMA in 0.033 s (491.3 GB/s)
VFIO UNMAP DMA in 0.049 s (323.9 GB/s)
For large folio, we achieve an approximate 64% performance improvement
in the VFIO UNMAP DMA item. For small folios, the performance test
results appear to show no significant changes.
[1]: https://github.com/awilliam/tests/blob/vfio-pci-mem-dma-map/vfio-pci-mem-dma-map.c
[2]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250610031013.98556-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com/
[3]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250529064947.38433-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com/
Suggested-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Signed-off-by: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@bytedance.com>
---
drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
index 8827e315e3d8..88a54b44df5b 100644
--- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
+++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c
@@ -806,17 +806,29 @@ static long vfio_pin_pages_remote(struct vfio_dma *dma, unsigned long vaddr,
return pinned;
}
+static inline void put_valid_unreserved_pfns(unsigned long start_pfn,
+ unsigned long npage, int prot)
+{
+ unpin_user_page_range_dirty_lock(pfn_to_page(start_pfn), npage,
+ prot & IOMMU_WRITE);
+}
+
static long vfio_unpin_pages_remote(struct vfio_dma *dma, dma_addr_t iova,
unsigned long pfn, unsigned long npage,
bool do_accounting)
{
long unlocked = 0, locked = vpfn_pages(dma, iova, npage);
- long i;
- for (i = 0; i < npage; i++)
- if (put_pfn(pfn++, dma->prot))
- unlocked++;
+ if (dma->has_rsvd) {
+ long i;
+ for (i = 0; i < npage; i++)
+ if (put_pfn(pfn++, dma->prot))
+ unlocked++;
+ } else {
+ put_valid_unreserved_pfns(pfn, npage, dma->prot);
+ unlocked = npage;
+ }
if (do_accounting)
vfio_lock_acct(dma, locked - unlocked, true);
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread