From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] KVM: MMU: fast page fault
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 12:18:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F7436FB.9000004@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F742951.7080003@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 03/29/2012 11:20 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> * Idea
> The present bit of page fault error code (EFEC.P) indicates whether the
> page table is populated on all levels, if this bit is set, we can know
> the page fault is caused by the page-protection bits (e.g. W/R bit) or
> the reserved bits.
>
> In KVM, in most cases, all this kind of page fault (EFEC.P = 1) can be
> simply fixed: the page fault caused by reserved bit
> (EFFC.P = 1 && EFEC.RSV = 1) has already been filtered out in fast mmio
> path. What we need do to fix the rest page fault (EFEC.P = 1 && RSV != 1)
> is just increasing the corresponding access on the spte.
>
> This pachset introduces a fast path to fix this kind of page fault: it
> is out of mmu-lock and need not walk host page table to get the mapping
> from gfn to pfn.
Wow!
Looks like interesting times are back in mmu-land.
Comments below are before review of actual patches, so maybe they're
already answered there, or maybe they're just nonsense.
> * Advantage
> - it is really fast
> it fixes page fault out of mmu-lock, and uses a very light way to avoid
> the race with other pathes. Also, it fixes page fault in the front of
> gfn_to_pfn, it means no host page table walking.
>
> - we can get lots of page fault with PFEC.P = 1 in KVM:
> - in the case of ept/npt
> after shadow page become stable (all gfn is mapped in shadow page table,
> it is a short stage since only one shadow page table is used and only a
> few of page is needed), almost all page fault is caused by write-protect
> (frame-buffer under Xwindow, migration), the other small part is caused
> by page merge/COW under KSM/THP.
>
> We do not hope it can fix the page fault caused by the read-only host
> page of KSM, since after COW, all the spte pointing to the gfn will be
> unmapped.
>
> - in the case of soft mmu
> - many spurious page fault due to tlb lazily flushed
> - lots of write-protect page fault (dirty bit track for guest pte, shadow
> page table write-protected, frame-buffer under Xwindow, migration, ...)
>
>
> * Implementation
> We can freely walk the page between walk_shadow_page_lockless_begin and
> walk_shadow_page_lockless_end, it can ensure all the shadow page is valid.
>
> In the most case, cmpxchg is fair enough to change the access bit of spte,
> but the write-protect path on softmmu/nested mmu is a especial case: it is
> a read-check-modify path: read spte, check W bit, then clear W bit.
We also set gpte.D and gpte.A, no? How do you handle that?
> In order
> to avoid marking spte writable after/during page write-protect, we do the
> trick like below:
>
> fast page fault path:
> lock RCU
> set identification in the spte
What if you can't (already taken)? Spin? Slow path?
> smp_mb()
> if (!rmap.PTE_LIST_WRITE_PROTECT)
> cmpxchg + w - vcpu-id
> unlock RCU
>
> write protect path:
> lock mmu-lock
> set rmap.PTE_LIST_WRITE_PROTECT
> smp_mb()
> if (spte.w || spte has identification)
> clear w bit and identification
> unlock mmu-lock
>
> Setting identification in the spte is used to notify page-protect path to
> modify the spte, then we can see the change in the cmpxchg.
>
> Setting identification is also a trick: it only set the last bit of spte
> that does not change the mapping and lose cpu status bits.
There are plenty of available bits, 53-62.
>
> The identification should be unique to avoid the below race:
>
> VCPU 0 VCPU 1 VCPU 2
> lock RCU
> spte + identification
> check conditions
> do write-protect, clear
> identification
> lock RCU
> set identification
> cmpxchg + w - identification
> OOPS!!!
Is it not sufficient to use just two bits?
pf_lock - taken by page fault path
wp_lock - taken by write protect path
pf cmpxchg checks both bits.
> We choose the vcpu id as the unique value, currently, 254 vcpus on VMX
> and 127 vcpus on softmmu can be fast. Keep it simply firtsly. :)
>
>
> * Performance
> It introduces a full memory barrier on the page write-protect path, i
> have done the test of kernbench in the text mode which does not generate
> write-protect page fault by frame-buffer avoiding the optimization
> introduced by this patch, it shows no regression.
>
> And there is the result tested by x11perf and migration on autotest:
>
> x11perf (x11perf -repeat 10 -comppixwin500):
> (Host: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2540M CPU @ 2.60GHz * 4 + 4G
> Guest: 4 vcpus + 1G)
>
> - For ept:
> $ x11perfcomp baseline-hard optimaze-hard
> 1: baseline-hard
> 2: optimaze-hard
>
> 1 2 Operation
> -------- -------- ---------
> 7060.0 7150.0 Composite 500x500 from pixmap to window
>
> - For shadow mmu:
> $ x11perfcomp baseline-soft optimaze-soft
> 1: baseline-soft
> 2: optimaze-soft
>
> 1 2 Operation
> -------- -------- ---------
> 6980.0 7490.0 Composite 500x500 from pixmap to window
>
> ( It is interesting that after this patch, the performance of x11perf on
> softmmu is better than it on hardmmu, i have tested it for many times,
> it is really true. :) )
It could be because you cannot use THP with dirty logging, so you pay
the overhead of TDP.
> autotest migration:
> (Host: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5690 @ 3.47GHz * 12 + 32G)
>
> - For ept:
>
> Before:
> smp2.Fedora.16.64.migrate
> Times .unix .with_autotest.dbench.unix total
> 1 102 204 309
> 2 68 203 275
> 3 67 218 289
>
> After:
> smp2.Fedora.16.64.migrate
> Times .unix .with_autotest.dbench.unix total
> 1 103 189 295
> 2 67 188 259
> 3 64 202 271
>
>
> - For shadow mmu:
>
> Before:
> smp2.Fedora.16.64.migrate
> Times .unix .with_autotest.dbench.unix total
> 1 102 262 368
> 2 68 220 292
> 3 68 234 307
>
> After:
> smp2.Fedora.16.64.migrate
> Times .unix .with_autotest.dbench.unix total
> 1 104 231 341
> 2 68 218 289
> 3 66 205 275
>
>
> Any comments are welcome. :)
>
Very impressive. Now to review the patches (will take me some time).
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-29 10:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 83+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-29 9:20 [PATCH 00/13] KVM: MMU: fast page fault Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:20 ` [PATCH 01/13] KVM: MMU: properly assert spte on rmap_next path Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:21 ` [PATCH 02/13] KVM: MMU: abstract spte write-protect Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 11:11 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-29 11:51 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:22 ` [PATCH 03/13] KVM: MMU: split FNAME(prefetch_invalid_gpte) Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 13:00 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-30 3:51 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:22 ` [PATCH 04/13] KVM: MMU: introduce FNAME(get_sp_gpa) Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 13:07 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-30 5:01 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-01 12:42 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-29 9:23 ` [PATCH 05/13] KVM: MMU: reset shadow_mmio_mask Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 13:10 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-29 15:28 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-29 16:24 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-29 9:23 ` [PATCH 06/13] KVM: VMX: export PFEC.P bit on ept Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:24 ` [PATCH 07/13] KVM: MMU: store more bits in rmap Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:25 ` [PATCH 08/13] KVM: MMU: fask check whether page is writable Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 15:49 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-30 5:10 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-01 15:52 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-05 17:54 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-12 23:08 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-13 10:26 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:25 ` [PATCH 09/13] KVM: MMU: get expected spte out of mmu-lock Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-01 15:53 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-05 18:25 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-09 12:28 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-09 13:16 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-09 13:21 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-29 9:26 ` [PATCH 10/13] KVM: MMU: store vcpu id in spte to notify page write-protect path Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:27 ` [PATCH 11/13] KVM: MMU: fast path of handling guest page fault Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-31 12:24 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-01 16:23 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-03 13:04 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-05 19:39 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:27 ` [PATCH 12/13] KVM: MMU: trace fast " Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 9:28 ` [PATCH 13/13] KVM: MMU: fix kvm_mmu_pagetable_walk tracepoint Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 10:18 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2012-03-29 11:40 ` [PATCH 00/13] KVM: MMU: fast page fault Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-29 12:57 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-30 9:18 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-03-31 13:12 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-01 12:58 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-05 21:57 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-06 5:24 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-09 13:20 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-09 13:59 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-09 13:12 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-09 13:55 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-09 14:01 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-09 14:25 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-09 17:58 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-09 18:13 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-09 19:31 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-09 18:26 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-09 19:46 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-10 3:06 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-10 10:04 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-11 1:47 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-11 9:15 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-10 10:39 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-10 11:40 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-10 11:58 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-11 12:15 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-11 12:38 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-11 14:14 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-11 14:21 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-11 22:26 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-13 14:25 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-15 9:32 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-16 15:49 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-16 16:02 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-17 6:26 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-17 7:51 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-17 12:37 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-17 12:41 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-17 14:54 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-17 14:56 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-18 13:42 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-17 6:16 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-10 10:10 ` Avi Kivity
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=4F7436FB.9000004@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).