KVM: MMU: optimize set_spte for page sync
The write protect verification in set_spte is unnecessary for page sync.
Its guaranteed that, if the unsync spte was writable, the target page does not have a write protected shadow (if it had, the spte would have been write protected under mmu_lock by rmap_write_protect before).
Same reasoning applies to mark_page_dirty: the gfn has been marked as dirty via the pagefault path.
The cost of hash table and memslot lookups are quite significant if the workload is pagetable write intensive resulting in increased mmu_lock contention.
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +14 -5
@@ -1529,7 +1529,7 @@ static int kvm_unsync_page(struct kvm_vc }static int mmu_need_write_protect (struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,gfn_t gfn, -bool can_unsync) +bool sync_page) {struct kvm_mmu_page *shadow;
@@ -1539,7 +1539,7 @@ static int mmu_need_write_protect(structreturn 1 ;if (shadow->unsync)return 0 ; -if (can_unsync && oos_shadow) +if (!sync_page && oos_shadow)return kvm_unsync_page (vcpu, shadow);return 1 ; }
@@ -1550,7 +1550,7 @@ static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp unsigned pte_access, int user_fault, int write_fault, int dirty, int largepage, gfn_t gfn, pfn_t pfn, bool speculative, - bool can_unsync) + bool sync_page) { u64 spte;int ret =0 ;
@@ -1593,7 +1593,16 @@ static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp spte |=PT_WRITABLE_MASK ; -if (mmu_need_write_protect (vcpu, gfn, can_unsync)) { +/* +* Optimization: for pte sync, if spte was writable the hash +* lookup is unnecessary (and expensive). Write protection +* is responsibility of mmu_get_page / kvm_sync_page. +* Same reasoning can be applied to dirty page accounting. +*/ +if (sync_page &&is_writeble_pte (*shadow_pte)) + goto set_pte; + +if (mmu_need_write_protect (vcpu, gfn, sync_page)) {pgprintk ("%s: found shadow page for %lx, marking ro\n" , __func__, gfn); ret =1 ;
@@ -1648,7 +1657,7 @@ static void mmu_set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu } }if (set_spte (vcpu, shadow_pte, pte_access, user_fault, write_fault, - dirty, largepage, gfn, pfn, speculative, true)) { + dirty, largepage, gfn, pfn, speculative, false)) {if (write_fault) *ptwrite =1 ; kvm_x86_ops->tlb_flush (vcpu);
arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h +1 -1
@@ -580,7 +580,7 @@ static int FNAME(sync_page)(struct kvm_v pte_access = sp->role.access &FNAME (gpte_access)(vcpu, gpte);set_spte (vcpu, &sp->spt[i], pte_access,0 ,0 ,is_dirty_pte (gpte),0 , gfn, -spte_to_pfn (sp->spt[i]), true, false); +spte_to_pfn (sp->spt[i]), true, true); }return !nr_present;
Quoted 8 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
The cost of hash table and memslot lookups are quite significant if the workload is pagetable write intensive resulting in increased
mmu_lockcontention.arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +0
-0@@ -1593,7 +1593,16 @@ static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp spte |=PT_WRITABLE_MASK ;
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp · line 1604
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +8
-1-if (mmu_need_write_protect (vcpu, gfn, can_unsync)) { +/* +* Optimization: for pte sync, if spte was writable the hash +* lookup is unnecessary (and expensive). Write protection +* is responsibility of mmu_get_page / kvm_sync_page. +* Same reasoning can be applied to dirty page accounting. +*/ +if (sync_page &&is_writeble_pte (*shadow_pte)) + goto set_pte;
What if *shadow_pte points at a different page? Is that possible?
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Quoted 6 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 4 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
The cost of hash table and memslot lookups are quite significant if the workload is pagetable write intensive resulting in increased
mmu_lockcontention.
Quoted 14 lines
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp · line 1603
Quoted 12 lines
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +8
-0@@ -1593,7 +1593,16 @@ static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp spte |=PT_WRITABLE_MASK ; - if (mmu_need_write_protect(vcpu, gfn, can_unsync)) { +/* +* Optimization: for pte sync, if spte was writable the hash +* lookup is unnecessary (and expensive). Write protection +* is responsibility of mmu_get_page / kvm_sync_page. +* Same reasoning can be applied to dirty page accounting. +*/ +if (sync_page &&is_writeble_pte (*shadow_pte)) + goto set_pte;What if
*shadow_ptepoints at a different page? Is that possible?
To a different gfn? Then sync_page will have nuked the spte:
if (gpte_to_gfn(gpte) != gfn || !is_present_pte(gpte) ||
!(gpte & PT_ACCESSED_MASK)) {
u64 nonpresent;
..
set_shadow_pte(&sp->spt[i], nonpresent);
}Otherwise:
/*
* Using the cached information from sp->gfns is safe because:
* - The spte has a reference to the struct page, so the pfn for a given
* gfn can't change unless all sptes pointing to it are nuked first.
Quoted 31 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
Quoted 6 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 4 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
The cost of hash table and memslot lookups are quite significant if the workload is pagetable write intensive resulting in increased
mmu_lockcontention.Quoted 14 lines
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp · line 1603
Quoted 12 lines
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +8
-0@@ -1593,7 +1593,16 @@ static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp spte |=PT_WRITABLE_MASK ; - if (mmu_need_write_protect(vcpu, gfn, can_unsync)) { +/* +* Optimization: for pte sync, if spte was writable the hash +* lookup is unnecessary (and expensive). Write protection +* is responsibility of mmu_get_page / kvm_sync_page. +* Same reasoning can be applied to dirty page accounting. +*/ +if (sync_page &&is_writeble_pte (*shadow_pte)) + goto set_pte;What if
*shadow_ptepoints at a different page? Is that possible?To a different gfn? Then
sync_pagewill have nuked the spte:if (gpte_to_gfn(gpte) != gfn || !is_present_pte(gpte) || !(gpte & PT_ACCESSED_MASK)) { u64 nonpresent; .. set_shadow_pte(&sp->spt[i], nonpresent); }
Quoted 6 lines
Otherwise:
/*
* Using the cached information fromsp->gfnsis safe because:
* - The spte has a reference to the struct page, so the pfn for a given
* gfn can't change unless all sptes pointing to it are nuked first.
*shadow_pte can point to a different page if the guest updates pagetable, there is a fault before resync, the fault updates the spte with new gfn (and pfn) via mmu_set_spte. In which case the gfn cache is updated since:
} else if (pfn != spte_to_pfn(*shadow_pte)) {
printk("hfn old %lx new %lx\n",
spte_to_pfn(*shadow_pte), pfn);
rmap_remove(vcpu->kvm, shadow_pte);Quoted 10 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
*shadow_ptecan point to a different page if the guest updates pagetable, there is a fault before resync, the fault updates the spte with new gfn (and pfn) viammu_set_spte. In which case the gfn cache is updated since:} else if (pfn != spte_to_pfn(*shadow_pte)) { printk("hfn old %lx new %lx\n", spte_to_pfn(*shadow_pte), pfn); rmap_remove(vcpu->kvm, shadow_pte);
Okay. Please resend but without the reversal of can_unsync, it will make a more readable patch. If you like, send a follow on that only does the reversal.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Quoted 12 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 10 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
*shadow_ptecan point to a different page if the guest updates pagetable, there is a fault before resync, the fault updates the spte with new gfn (and pfn) viammu_set_spte. In which case the gfn cache is updated since:} else if (pfn != spte_to_pfn(*shadow_pte)) { printk("hfn old %lx new %lx\n", spte_to_pfn(*shadow_pte), pfn); rmap_remove(vcpu->kvm, shadow_pte);
Quoted 3 lines
Okay. Please resend but without the reversal of
can_unsync, it will make a more readable patch. If you like, send a follow on that only does the reversal.
Here it goes.
KVM: MMU: optimize set_spte for page sync
The write protect verification in set_spte is unnecessary for page sync.
Its guaranteed that, if the unsync spte was writable, the target page does not have a write protected shadow (if it had, the spte would have been write protected under mmu_lock by rmap_write_protect before).
Same reasoning applies to mark_page_dirty: the gfn has been marked as dirty via the pagefault path.
The cost of hash table and memslot lookups are quite significant if the workload is pagetable write intensive resulting in increased mmu_lock contention.
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +9 -0
@@ -1593,6 +1593,15 @@ static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcp spte |=PT_WRITABLE_MASK ; +/* +* Optimization: for pte sync, if spte was writable the hash +* lookup is unnecessary (and expensive). Write protection +* is responsibility of mmu_get_page / kvm_sync_page. +* Same reasoning can be applied to dirty page accounting. +*/ +if (!can_unsync &&is_writeble_pte (*shadow_pte)) + goto set_pte; +if (mmu_need_write_protect (vcpu, gfn, can_unsync)) {pgprintk ("%s: found shadow page for %lx, marking ro\n" , __func__, gfn);
Avi Kivity
AppliedQuoted 11 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
Here it goes.
KVM: MMU: optimize
set_sptefor page syncThe write protect verification in
set_spteis unnecessary for page sync.Its guaranteed that, if the unsync spte was writable, the target page does not have a write protected shadow (if it had, the spte would have been write protected under
mmu_lockbyrmap_write_protectbefore).
Quoted 8 lines
Same reasoning applies to
mark_page_dirty: the gfn has been marked as dirty via the pagefault path.The cost of hash table and memslot lookups are quite significant if the workload is pagetable write intensive resulting in increased
mmu_lockcontention.
Applied, thanks.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Quoted 15 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 14 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
Here it goes.
KVM: MMU: optimize
set_sptefor page syncThe write protect verification in
set_spteis unnecessary for page sync.Its guaranteed that, if the unsync spte was writable, the target page does not have a write protected shadow (if it had, the spte would have been write protected under
mmu_lockbyrmap_write_protectbefore).Same reasoning applies to
mark_page_dirty: the gfn has been marked as dirty via the pagefault path.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
The cost of hash table and memslot lookups are quite significant if the workload is pagetable write intensive resulting in increased
mmu_lockcontention.Applied, thanks.
Avi,
Do you have objections for submitting this patch for 2.6.28 ? The hash lookup kills performance of pagetable write + context switch intensive workloads.
Quoted 4 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
Do you have objections for submitting this patch for 2.6.28 ? The hash lookup kills performance of pagetable write + context switch intensive workloads.
Can you quantify?
2.6.28 is out of the question, 2.6.28.stable is possible, depending on the actual performance difference. I'd hate to introduce a correctness problem just to improve performance.
Signature · 1 line
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
Quoted 11 lines · Avi Kivity
Quoted 4 lines · Marcelo Tosatti
Do you have objections for submitting this patch for 2.6.28 ? The hash lookup kills performance of pagetable write + context switch intensive workloads.
Can you quantify?
2.6.28 is out of the question, 2.6.28.stable is possible, depending on the actual performance difference. I'd hate to introduce a correctness problem just to improve performance.
Around 10% improvement on some workloads.