[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 04/10] intel-iommu: only do page walk for MAP
From: |
Auger Eric |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 04/10] intel-iommu: only do page walk for MAP notifiers |
Date: |
Thu, 17 May 2018 15:39:50 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 |
Hi Peter,
On 05/04/2018 05:08 AM, Peter Xu wrote:
> For UNMAP-only IOMMU notifiers, we don't really need to walk the page
s/really// ;-)
> tables. Fasten that procedure by skipping the page table walk. That
> should boost performance for UNMAP-only notifiers like vhost.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <address@hidden>
> ---
> include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h | 2 ++
> hw/i386/intel_iommu.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h b/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> index ee517704e7..9e0a6c1c6a 100644
> --- a/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> +++ b/include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
> @@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ struct VTDAddressSpace {
> IntelIOMMUState *iommu_state;
> VTDContextCacheEntry context_cache_entry;
> QLIST_ENTRY(VTDAddressSpace) next;
> + /* Superset of notifier flags that this address space has */
> + IOMMUNotifierFlag notifier_flags;
> };
>
> struct VTDBus {
> diff --git a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> index 112971638d..9a418abfb6 100644
> --- a/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> +++ b/hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
> @@ -138,6 +138,12 @@ static inline void vtd_iommu_unlock(IntelIOMMUState *s)
> qemu_mutex_unlock(&s->iommu_lock);
> }
>
> +/* Whether the address space needs to notify new mappings */
> +static inline gboolean vtd_as_notify_mappings(VTDAddressSpace *as)
would suggest vtd_as_has_map_notifier()? But tastes & colours ;-)
> +{
> + return as->notifier_flags & IOMMU_NOTIFIER_MAP;
> +}
> +
> /* GHashTable functions */
> static gboolean vtd_uint64_equal(gconstpointer v1, gconstpointer v2)
> {
> @@ -1433,14 +1439,35 @@ static void
> vtd_iotlb_page_invalidate_notify(IntelIOMMUState *s,
> VTDAddressSpace *vtd_as;
> VTDContextEntry ce;
> int ret;
> + hwaddr size = (1 << am) * VTD_PAGE_SIZE;
>
> QLIST_FOREACH(vtd_as, &(s->notifiers_list), next) {
> ret = vtd_dev_to_context_entry(s, pci_bus_num(vtd_as->bus),
> vtd_as->devfn, &ce);
> if (!ret && domain_id == VTD_CONTEXT_ENTRY_DID(ce.hi)) {
> - vtd_page_walk(&ce, addr, addr + (1 << am) * VTD_PAGE_SIZE,
> - vtd_page_invalidate_notify_hook,
> - (void *)&vtd_as->iommu, true, s->aw_bits);
> + if (vtd_as_notify_mappings(vtd_as)) {
> + /*
> + * For MAP-inclusive notifiers, we need to walk the
> + * page table to sync the shadow page table.
> + */
Potentially we may have several notifiers attached to the IOMMU MR ~
vtd_as, each of them having different flags. Those flags are OR'ed in
memory_region_update_iommu_notify_flags and this is the one you now
store in the vtd_as. So maybe your comment may rather state:
as soon as we have at least one MAP notifier, we need to do the PTW?
nit: not related to this patch: vtd_page_walk kerneldoc comments misses
@notify_unmap param comment
side note: the name of the hook is a bit misleading as it suggests we
invalidate the entry, whereas we update any valid entry and invalidate
stale ones (if notify_unmap=true)?
> + vtd_page_walk(&ce, addr, addr + size,
> + vtd_page_invalidate_notify_hook,
> + (void *)&vtd_as->iommu, true, s->aw_bits);
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * For UNMAP-only notifiers, we don't need to walk the
> + * page tables. We just deliver the PSI down to
> + * invalidate caches.
We just unmap the range?
> + */
> + IOMMUTLBEntry entry = {
> + .target_as = &address_space_memory,
> + .iova = addr,
> + .translated_addr = 0,
> + .addr_mask = size - 1,
> + .perm = IOMMU_NONE,
> + };
> + memory_region_notify_iommu(&vtd_as->iommu, entry);
> + }
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -2380,6 +2407,9 @@ static void
> vtd_iommu_notify_flag_changed(IOMMUMemoryRegion *iommu,
> exit(1);
> }
>
> + /* Update per-address-space notifier flags */
> + vtd_as->notifier_flags = new;
> +
> if (old == IOMMU_NOTIFIER_NONE) {
> /* Insert new ones */
> QLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&s->notifiers_list, vtd_as, next);
> @@ -2890,8 +2920,11 @@ static void vtd_iommu_replay(IOMMUMemoryRegion
> *iommu_mr, IOMMUNotifier *n)
> PCI_FUNC(vtd_as->devfn),
> VTD_CONTEXT_ENTRY_DID(ce.hi),
> ce.hi, ce.lo);
> - vtd_page_walk(&ce, 0, ~0ULL, vtd_replay_hook, (void *)n, false,
> - s->aw_bits);
> + if (vtd_as_notify_mappings(vtd_as)) {
> + /* This is required only for MAP typed notifiers */
> + vtd_page_walk(&ce, 0, ~0ULL, vtd_replay_hook, (void *)n, false,
> + s->aw_bits);
> + }
> } else {
> trace_vtd_replay_ce_invalid(bus_n, PCI_SLOT(vtd_as->devfn),
> PCI_FUNC(vtd_as->devfn));
>
A worthwhile improvement indeed!
Thanks
Eric
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 04/10] intel-iommu: only do page walk for MAP notifiers, Peter Xu, 2018/05/03
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 04/10] intel-iommu: only do page walk for MAP notifiers,
Auger Eric <=
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 03/10] intel-iommu: add iommu lock, Peter Xu, 2018/05/03
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 05/10] intel-iommu: introduce vtd_page_walk_info, Peter Xu, 2018/05/03