On 06.06.2011, at 15:51, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> This patch converts hw/vesa.c to use guest-mapped memory for framebuffer and
> drops the slow MMIO emulation. This speeds up framebuffer accesses
> considerably. Please note that this can be optimized even more with the
> KVM_GET_DIRTY_LOG ioctl() as explained by Alexander Graf.
>
> Cc: Alexander Graf <[email protected]>
> Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov <[email protected]>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
> Cc: John Floren <[email protected]>
> Cc: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <[email protected]>
> ---
> tools/kvm/hw/vesa.c | 17 +++++------------
> tools/kvm/include/kvm/kvm.h | 1 +
> tools/kvm/kvm.c | 8 ++++----
> 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/kvm/hw/vesa.c b/tools/kvm/hw/vesa.c
> index 48d31ce..be9c109 100644
> --- a/tools/kvm/hw/vesa.c
> +++ b/tools/kvm/hw/vesa.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> #include "kvm/irq.h"
> #include "kvm/kvm.h"
> #include "kvm/pci.h"
> +#include <sys/mman.h>
>
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #include <sys/ioctl.h>
> @@ -40,14 +41,6 @@ static struct pci_device_header vesa_pci_device = {
> .bar[1] = VESA_MEM_ADDR | PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEMORY,
> };
>
> -static void vesa_mmio_callback(u64 addr, u8 *data, u32 len, u8 is_write)
> -{
> - if (!is_write)
> - return;
> -
> - fb__write(addr, data, len);
> -}
> -
> static struct framebuffer vesafb;
>
> struct framebuffer *vesa__init(struct kvm *kvm)
> @@ -65,12 +58,12 @@ struct framebuffer *vesa__init(struct kvm *kvm)
> vesa_pci_device.bar[0] = vesa_base_addr |
> PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO;
> pci__register(&vesa_pci_device, dev);
>
> - kvm__register_mmio(kvm, VESA_MEM_ADDR, VESA_MEM_SIZE,
> &vesa_mmio_callback);
> -
> - mem = calloc(1, VESA_MEM_SIZE);
> - if (!mem)
> + mem = mmap(NULL, VESA_MEM_SIZE, PROT_RW, MAP_ANON_NORESERVE, -1, 0);
> + if (mem == MAP_FAILED)
> return NULL;
>
> + kvm__register_mem_slot(kvm, 1, VESA_MEM_ADDR, VESA_MEM_SIZE, mem);
Slot 1
> +
> vesafb = (struct framebuffer) {
> .width = VESA_WIDTH,
> .height = VESA_HEIGHT,
> diff --git a/tools/kvm/include/kvm/kvm.h b/tools/kvm/include/kvm/kvm.h
> index 55551de..0628402 100644
> --- a/tools/kvm/include/kvm/kvm.h
> +++ b/tools/kvm/include/kvm/kvm.h
> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ void kvm__stop_timer(struct kvm *kvm);
> void kvm__irq_line(struct kvm *kvm, int irq, int level);
> bool kvm__emulate_io(struct kvm *kvm, u16 port, void *data, int direction,
> int size, u32 count);
> bool kvm__emulate_mmio(struct kvm *kvm, u64 phys_addr, u8 *data, u32 len, u8
> is_write);
> +void kvm__register_mem_slot(struct kvm *kvm, u32 slot, u64 guest_phys, u64
> size, void *userspace_addr);
> bool kvm__register_mmio(struct kvm *kvm, u64 phys_addr, u64 phys_addr_len,
> void (*kvm_mmio_callback_fn)(u64 addr, u8 *data, u32 len, u8 is_write));
> bool kvm__deregister_mmio(struct kvm *kvm, u64 phys_addr);
> void kvm__pause(void);
> diff --git a/tools/kvm/kvm.c b/tools/kvm/kvm.c
> index 54e3203..de642c7 100644
> --- a/tools/kvm/kvm.c
> +++ b/tools/kvm/kvm.c
> @@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ static bool kvm__cpu_supports_vm(void)
> return regs.ecx & (1 << feature);
> }
>
> -static void kvm_register_mem_slot(struct kvm *kvm, u32 slot, u64 guest_phys,
> u64 size, void *userspace_addr)
> +void kvm__register_mem_slot(struct kvm *kvm, u32 slot, u64 guest_phys, u64
> size, void *userspace_addr)
> {
> struct kvm_userspace_memory_region mem;
> int ret;
> @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ void kvm__init_ram(struct kvm *kvm)
> phys_size = kvm->ram_size;
> host_mem = kvm->ram_start;
>
> - kvm_register_mem_slot(kvm, 0, phys_start, phys_size, host_mem);
> + kvm__register_mem_slot(kvm, 0, phys_start, phys_size, host_mem);
> } else {
> /* First RAM range from zero to the PCI gap: */
>
> @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ void kvm__init_ram(struct kvm *kvm)
> phys_size = KVM_32BIT_GAP_START;
> host_mem = kvm->ram_start;
>
> - kvm_register_mem_slot(kvm, 0, phys_start, phys_size, host_mem);
> + kvm__register_mem_slot(kvm, 0, phys_start, phys_size, host_mem);
>
> /* Second RAM range from 4GB to the end of RAM: */
>
> @@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ void kvm__init_ram(struct kvm *kvm)
> phys_size = kvm->ram_size - phys_size;
> host_mem = kvm->ram_start + phys_start;
>
> - kvm_register_mem_slot(kvm, 1, phys_start, phys_size, host_mem);
> + kvm__register_mem_slot(kvm, 1, phys_start, phys_size, host_mem);
... and also slot 1. Is this on purpose or could there be potential overwriting?
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
