Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:Regards,Anthony Liguori ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: [PATCH] KVM: Add hypercall queue for paravirt_ops implementation Author: Anthony Liguori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Implemented a hypercall queue that can be used when paravirt_ops lazy mode is enabled. This patch enables queueing of MMU write operations and CR updates. This results in about a 50% bump in kernbench performance. Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/kvm.c b/arch/i386/kernel/kvm.c index 07ce38e..4b323f1 100644 --- a/arch/i386/kernel/kvm.c +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/kvm.c @@ -33,8 +33,10 @@ struct kvm_paravirt_state unsigned long cached_cr[5]; int cr_valid[5];- struct kvm_vmca *vmca;+ enum paravirt_lazy_mode mode; struct kvm_hypercall_entry *queue; + + struct kvm_vmca *vmca; void (*hypercall)(void);u64 vmca_gpa;@@ -42,17 +44,17 @@ struct kvm_paravirt_statestatic DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct kvm_paravirt_state *, paravirt_state); +static int do_hypercall_batching;static int do_mmu_write; static int do_cr_read_caching; static int do_nop_io_delay; static u64 msr_set_vmca;-static long kvm_hypercall(unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1,- unsigned long p2, unsigned long p3, - unsigned long p4) +static long _kvm_hypercall(struct kvm_paravirt_state *state, + unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1, + unsigned long p2, unsigned long p3, + unsigned long p4) { - struct kvm_paravirt_state *state - = per_cpu(paravirt_state, smp_processor_id()); long ret;asm volatile("call *(%6) \n\t"@@ -69,6 +71,55 @@ static long kvm_hypercall(unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1, return ret; }+static int can_defer_hypercall(struct kvm_paravirt_state *state,+ unsigned int nr) +{ + if (state->mode == PARAVIRT_LAZY_MMU) { + if (nr == KVM_HYPERCALL_MMU_WRITE) + return 1; + } else if (state->mode == PARAVIRT_LAZY_CPU) { + if (nr == KVM_HYPERCALL_SET_CR) + return 1; + } + + return 0; +} + +static void _kvm_hypercall_defer(struct kvm_paravirt_state *state, + unsigned int nr, + unsigned long p1, unsigned long p2, + unsigned long p3, unsigned long p4) +{ + struct kvm_hypercall_entry *entry; + + if (state->vmca->queue_index == state->vmca->max_queue_index) + _kvm_hypercall(state, KVM_HYPERCALL_FLUSH, 0, 0, 0, 0); + + /* FIXME: are we preempt safe here? */BUG_ON(preemptible()) would be a reasonable thing to put here to be sure.
Ok.
+ entry = &state->queue[state->vmca->queue_index++]; + entry->nr = nr; + entry->p1 = p1; + entry->p2 = p2; + entry->p3 = p3; + entry->p4 = p4; +} + +static long kvm_hypercall(unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1, + unsigned long p2, unsigned long p3, + unsigned long p4) +{ + struct kvm_paravirt_state *state + = per_cpu(paravirt_state, smp_processor_id());Rather than using this here and passing state around, you could use either x86_read/write_percpu, or get/put_cpu_var (or __get_vpu_var if you don't need the preempt-disable).
Ok.
+ long ret = 0; + + if (can_defer_hypercall(state, nr)) + _kvm_hypercall_defer(state, nr, p1, p2, p3, p4); + else + ret = _kvm_hypercall(state, nr, p1, p2, p3, p4); + + return ret; +} + /* * No need for any "IO delay" on KVM */ @@ -107,7 +158,9 @@ static void kvm_write_cr(int reg, unsigned long value) state->cr_valid[reg] = 1; state->cached_cr[reg] = value;- if (reg == 0)+ if (state->mode == PARAVIRT_LAZY_CPU) + kvm_hypercall(KVM_HYPERCALL_SET_CR, reg, value, 0, 0); + else if (reg == 0) native_write_cr0(value); else if (reg == 3) native_write_cr3(value); @@ -218,6 +271,18 @@ static void kvm_pmd_clear(pmd_t *pmdp) kvm_mmu_write(pmdp, &pmd, sizeof(pmd)); }+static void kvm_set_lazy_mode(enum paravirt_lazy_mode mode)+{ + struct kvm_paravirt_state *state + = per_cpu(paravirt_state, smp_processor_id()); + + if (mode == PARAVIRT_LAZY_FLUSH || mode == PARAVIRT_LAZY_NONE) { + if (state->vmca->queue_index) + _kvm_hypercall(state, KVM_HYPERCALL_FLUSH, 0, 0, 0, 0); + } + state->mode = mode;No, you don't want to set state->mode to LAZY_FLUSH (its not a mode, just a action which overloads the interface).
Thanks, I wasn't aware of that.
+} + static void paravirt_ops_setup(void) { paravirt_ops.name = "KVM"; @@ -249,6 +314,9 @@ static void paravirt_ops_setup(void) paravirt_ops.set_pud = kvm_set_pud; }+ if (do_hypercall_batching)+ paravirt_ops.set_lazy_mode = kvm_set_lazy_mode; + paravirt_ops.paravirt_enabled = 1;apply_paravirt(__parainstructions, __parainstructions_end);@@ -293,6 +361,9 @@ static int paravirt_initialize(void) if ((edx & KVM_FEATURE_MMU_WRITE)) do_mmu_write = 1;+ if ((edx & KVM_FEATURE_HYPERCALL_BATCHING))+ do_hypercall_batching = 1; + on_each_cpu(paravirt_activate, NULL, 0, 1);return 0;@@ -303,6 +374,9 @@ static __init void paravirt_free_state(struct kvm_paravirt_state *state) if (!state) return;+ if (state->queue)+ __free_page(pfn_to_page(__pa(state->queue) >> PAGE_SHIFT)); + if (state->hypercall) __free_page(pfn_to_page(__pa(state->hypercall) >> PAGE_SHIFT));@@ -329,8 +403,15 @@ static __init struct kvm_paravirt_state *paravirt_alloc_state(void)if (!state->hypercall) goto err;+ state->queue = (void *)get_zeroed_page(GFP_KERNEL);+ if (!state->queue) + goto err; + state->vmca_gpa = __pa(state->vmca); state->vmca->hypercall_gpa = __pa(state->hypercall); + state->vmca->queue_gpa = __pa(state->queue); + state->vmca->max_queue_index + = (PAGE_SIZE / sizeof(struct kvm_hypercall_entry));return state; diff --git a/drivers/kvm/kvm.h b/drivers/kvm/kvm.hindex b08272b..d531899 100644 --- a/drivers/kvm/kvm.h +++ b/drivers/kvm/kvm.h @@ -291,6 +291,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu { gpa_t para_state_gpa; struct page *para_state_page; gpa_t hypercall_gpa; + struct page *queue_page; unsigned long cr4; unsigned long cr8; u64 pdptrs[4]; /* pae */ diff --git a/drivers/kvm/kvm_main.c b/drivers/kvm/kvm_main.c index 4f65729..79a2a64 100644 --- a/drivers/kvm/kvm_main.c +++ b/drivers/kvm/kvm_main.c @@ -94,7 +94,8 @@ struct vfsmount *kvmfs_mnt;#define KVM_PARAVIRT_FEATURES \(KVM_FEATURE_VMCA | KVM_FEATURE_NOP_IO_DELAY | \ - KVM_FEATURE_CR_READ_CACHE | KVM_FEATURE_MMU_WRITE) + KVM_FEATURE_CR_READ_CACHE | KVM_FEATURE_MMU_WRITE | \ + KVM_FEATURE_HYPERCALL_BATCHING)#define KVM_MSR_SET_VMCA 0x87655678 @@ -1369,6 +1370,24 @@ static int kvm_hypercall_mmu_write(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gva_t addr,return 0; }+static int kvm_hypercall_set_cr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,+ u32 reg, unsigned long value) +{ + switch (reg) { + case 0: + set_cr0(vcpu, value); + break; + case 3: + set_cr3(vcpu, value); + break; + case 4: + set_cr4(vcpu, value); + break; + } + + return 0; +} + static int dispatch_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long nr, unsigned long p1, unsigned long p2, unsigned long p3, unsigned long p4) @@ -1376,10 +1395,36 @@ static int dispatch_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long nr, switch (nr) { case KVM_HYPERCALL_MMU_WRITE: return kvm_hypercall_mmu_write(vcpu, p1, p2, p3, p4); + case KVM_HYPERCALL_SET_CR: + return kvm_hypercall_set_cr(vcpu, p1, p2); } return -ENOSYS; }+static int kvm_hypercall_flush(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)+{ + struct kvm_hypercall_entry *queue; + struct kvm_vmca *vmca; + int ret = 0; + int i; + + queue = kmap(vcpu->queue_page); + vmca = kmap(vcpu->para_state_page);kmap_atomic? Or why not keep them mapped all the time?
On the kvm side, this ends up calling emulator_write_phys() which IIRC can potentially sleep.
Regards, Anthony Liguori
J
_______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
