From: Jeremi Piotrowski <jpiotrowski@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Tianyu Lan <ltykernel@gmail.com>,
"Michael Kelley (LINUX)" <mikelley@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: "KVM: x86/mmu: Overhaul TDP MMU zapping and flushing" breaks SVM on Hyper-V
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 21:27:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20d189fc-8d20-8083-b448-460cc0420151@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABgObfaZQOvt6v0yGz3MR7FBU7DcrTTGmS6M8RWCX0uy6WML1Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 13/02/2023 20:56, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 8:12 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
>>> My reading of the spec[1] is that HV_X64_NESTED_ENLIGHTENED_TLB will cause
>>> svm_flush_tlb_current to behave (in Intel parlance) as an INVVPID rather
>>> than an INVEPT.
>>
>> Oh! Good catch! Yeah, that'll be a problem.
>>
>>> So svm_flush_tlb_current has to be changed to also add a
>>> call to HvCallFlushGuestPhysicalAddressSpace. I'm not sure if that's a good
>>> idea though.
>>
>> That's not strictly necessary, e.g. flushes from kvm_invalidate_pcid() and
>> kvm_post_set_cr4() don't need to effect a full flush. I believe the virtual
>> address flush is also sufficient for avic_activate_vmcb(). Nested (from KVM's
>> perspective, i.e. running L3) can just be mutually exclusive with
>> HV_X64_NESTED_ENLIGHTENED_TLB.
>>
>> That just leaves kvm_mmu_new_pgd()'s force_flush_and_sync_on_reuse and the
>> aforementioned kvm_mmu_load().
>>
>> That said, the above cases where a virtual address flush is sufficient are
>> rare operations when using NPT, so adding a new KVM_REQ_TLB_FLUSH_ROOT or
>> whatever probably isn't worth doing.
>>
>>> First, that's a TLB shootdown rather than just a local thing;
>>> flush_tlb_current is supposed to be relatively cheap, and there would be a
>>> lot of them because of the unconditional calls to
>>> nested_svm_transition_tlb_flush on vmentry/vmexit.
>>
>> This isn't a nested scenario for KVM though.
>
> Yes, but svm_flush_tlb_current() *is* also used in nested scenarios so
> it's like you said below---you would have to disable enlightened TLB
> when EFER.SVME=1 or something like that.
>
>>> Depending on the performance results of adding the hypercall to
>>> svm_flush_tlb_current, the fix could indeed be to just disable usage of
>>> HV_X64_NESTED_ENLIGHTENED_TLB.
>>
>> Minus making nested SVM (L3) mutually exclusive, I believe this will do the trick:
>>
>> + /* blah blah blah */
>> + hv_flush_tlb_current(vcpu);
>> +
>
> Yes, it's either this or disabling the feature.
>
> Paolo
Combining the two sub-threads: both of the suggestions:
a) adding a hyperv_flush_guest_mapping(__pa(root->spt) after kvm_tdp_mmu_get_vcpu_root_hpa's call to tdp_mmu_alloc_sp()
b) adding a hyperv_flush_guest_mapping(vcpu->arch.mmu->root.hpa) to svm_flush_tlb_current()
appear to work in my test case (L2 vm startup until panic due to missing rootfs).
But in both these cases (and also when I completely disable HV_X64_NESTED_ENLIGHTENED_TLB)
the runtime of an iteration of the test is noticeably longer compared to tdp_mmu=0.
So in terms of performance the ranking is (fastest to slowest):
1. tdp_mmu=0 + enlightened TLB
2. tdp_mmu=0 + no enlightened TLB
3. tdp_mmu=1 (enlightened TLB makes minimal difference)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-14 20:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-10 18:17 "KVM: x86/mmu: Overhaul TDP MMU zapping and flushing" breaks SVM on Hyper-V Jeremi Piotrowski
2023-02-10 18:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-13 12:44 ` Jeremi Piotrowski
2023-02-13 12:50 ` Paolo Bonzini
2023-02-13 18:05 ` Jeremi Piotrowski
2023-02-13 18:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
2023-02-13 17:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-13 17:49 ` Jeremi Piotrowski
2023-02-13 18:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2023-02-13 19:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-13 19:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
2023-02-14 20:27 ` Jeremi Piotrowski [this message]
2023-02-15 22:16 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-02-16 14:40 ` Jeremi Piotrowski
2023-02-24 16:17 ` Jeremi Piotrowski
2023-02-24 16:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=20d189fc-8d20-8083-b448-460cc0420151@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=jpiotrowski@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltykernel@gmail.com \
--cc=mikelley@microsoft.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.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