linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 00/21] KVM: x86: CPU isolation and direct interrupts delivery to guests

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: <50488D14.4010304@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 06 Sep 2012 14:46:28 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama.qu@...achi.com>
CC:	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 00/21] KVM: x86: CPU isolation and direct interrupts
 delivery to guests

On 09/06/2012 02:27 PM, Tomoki Sekiyama wrote:
> This RFC patch series provides facility to dedicate CPUs to KVM guests
> and enable the guests to handle interrupts from passed-through PCI devices
> directly (without VM exit and relay by the host).
> 
> With this feature, we can improve throughput and response time of the device
> and the host's CPU usage by reducing the overhead of interrupt handling.
> This is good for the application using very high throughput/frequent
> interrupt device (e.g. 10GbE NIC).
> Real-time applicatoins also gets benefit from CPU isolation feature, which
> reduces interfare from host kernel tasks and scheduling delay.
> 
> The overview of this patch series is presented in CloudOpen 2012.
> The slides are available at:
> http://events.linuxfoundation.org/images/stories/pdf/lcna_co2012_sekiyama.pdf

During Plumbers 2012, both Intel and AMD disclosed upcoming features to
their processors (APIC-V and AVIC) that allow directing device
interrupts to guest vcpus without host kernel involvement.  This works
without pinning, dedicating a core to a guest, or any special measures
beyond support for the feature.

CPU isolation is still useful to improve real-time latency further, but
this is really independent of kvm.

I am inclined to reject this feature in favour of the new hardware
support.  Sorry, I know this isn't nice to hear, but the extra
maintenance burden cannot be justified for a niche use case with special
limitations when generally useful feature exploiting proper hardware
support provides the same functionality.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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/