linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 19/22] KVM: MMU: lockless walking shadow page table

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4E0B1CE8.2060803@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jun 2011 20:39:04 +0800
From:	Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC:	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 19/22] KVM: MMU: lockless walking shadow page table

On 06/29/2011 08:27 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/29/2011 03:28 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 06/29/2011 08:18 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> >  On 06/29/2011 02:50 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> >>  >>   >
>> >>  >>   >    I think we should do this unconditionally.  The cost of ping-ponging the shared cache line containing reader_counter will increase with large smp counts.  On the other hand, zap_page is very rare, so it can be a little slower.  Also, less code paths = easier to understand.
>> >>  >>   >
>> >>  >>
>> >>  >>   On soft mmu, zap_page is very frequently, it can cause performance regression in my test.
>> >>  >
>> >>  >   Any idea what the cause of the regression is?  It seems to me that simply deferring freeing shouldn't have a large impact.
>> >>  >
>> >>
>> >>  I guess it is because the page is freed too frequently, i have done the test, it shows
>> >>  about 3219 pages is freed per second
>> >>
>> >>  Kernbench performance comparing:
>> >>
>> >>  the origin way: 3m27.723
>> >>  free all shadow page in rcu context: 3m30.519
>> >
>> >  I don't recall seeing such a high free rate.  Who is doing all this zapping?
>> >
>> >  You may be able to find out with the function tracer + call graph.
>> >
>>
>> I looked into it before, it is caused by "write flood" detected, i also noticed
>> some pages are zapped and allocation again and again, maybe we need to improve
>> the algorithm of detecting "write flood".
> 
> Ok.  Let's drop the two paths, and put this improvement on the TODO instead.
> 

Avi, i am sorry, i do not understand it clearly, it means keep the patch as the
original way and do the improvement after it merged?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/