From: "Emilio G. Cota" <cota@braap.org>
To: "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] ideas for improving TLB performance (help with TCG backend wanted)
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 14:09:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181002180948.GA19889@flamenco> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k1n0lu8b.fsf@linaro.org>
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 07:48:20 +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
>
> Emilio G. Cota <cota@braap.org> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 01:19:51 +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
> >> If we are going to have an indirection then we can also drop the
> >> requirement to scale the TLB according to the number of MMU indexes we
> >> have to support. It's fairly wasteful when a bunch of them are almost
> >> never used unless you are running stuff that uses them.
> >
> > So with dynamic TLB sizing, what you're suggesting here is to resize
> > each MMU array independently (depending on their use rate) instead
> > of using a single "TLB size" for all MMU indexes. Am I understanding
> > your point correctly?
>
> Not quite - I think it would overly complicate the lookup to have a
> differently sized TLB lookup for each mmu index - even if their usage
> patterns are different.
It just adds a load to get the mask, which will most likely be
in the L1. The value is not used after 3 instructions later, when
the L1 read will have completed.
> I just meant that if we already have the cost of an indirection we don't
> have to ensure:
>
> CPUTLBEntry tlb_table[NB_MMU_MODES][CPU_TLB_SIZE];
> CPUIOTLBEntry iotlb[NB_MMU_MODES][CPU_TLB_SIZE];
>
> restrict their sizes so any entry in the 2D array can be indexed
> directly from env. Currently CPU_TLB_SIZE/CPU_TLB_BITS is restricted by
> the number of NB_MMU_MODES we have to support. But if each can be
> flushed and managed separately we can have:
>
> CPUTLBEntry *tlb_table[NB_MMU_MODES];
>
> And size CPU_TLB_SIZE for the maximum offset we can mange in the lookup
> code. This is mainly driven by the varying
> TCG_TARGET_TLB_DISPLACEMENT_BITS each backend has available to it.
What I implemented is what you suggest, but with dynamic resizing based
on usage. I'm keeping the current CPU_TLB_SIZE as the minimum size, and
took Pranith's TCG_TARGET_TLB_MAX_INDEX_BITS definitions (from 2017)
to limit the max tlb size per mmu.
I'll prepare an RFC.
Thanks,
Emilio
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-02 18:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20180919175423.GA25553@flamenco>
[not found] ` <87va71uijc.fsf@linaro.org>
2018-10-01 18:34 ` [Qemu-devel] ideas for improving TLB performance (help with TCG backend wanted) Emilio G. Cota
2018-10-01 20:40 ` Richard Henderson
2018-10-02 1:54 ` Emilio G. Cota
2018-10-02 6:48 ` Alex Bennée
2018-10-02 18:09 ` Emilio G. Cota [this message]
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=20181002180948.GA19889@flamenco \
--to=cota@braap.org \
--cc=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).