linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 kernel 3/5] virtio-balloon: implementation of VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_CHUNK

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: <58C28FF8.5040403@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2017 19:37:28 +0800
From:   Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
CC:     virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        qemu-devel@...gnu.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Liang Li <liang.z.li@...el.com>,
        "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
        Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Liang Li <liliang324@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 kernel 3/5] virtio-balloon: implementation of VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_CHUNK_TRANSFER

On 03/09/2017 10:14 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 01:40:28PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote:
>> From: Liang Li <liang.z.li@...el.com>
>> 1) allocating pages (6.5%)
>> 2) sending PFNs to host (68.3%)
>> 3) address translation (6.1%)
>> 4) madvise (19%)
>>
>> This patch optimizes step 2) by transfering pages to the host in
>> chunks. A chunk consists of guest physically continuous pages, and
>> it is offered to the host via a base PFN (i.e. the start PFN of
>> those physically continuous pages) and the size (i.e. the total
>> number of the pages). A normal chunk is formated as below:
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> |  Base (52 bit)               | Size (12 bit)|
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> For large size chunks, an extended chunk format is used:
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> |                 Base (64 bit)               |
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> |                 Size (64 bit)               |
>> -----------------------------------------------
> What's the advantage to extended chunks?  IOW, why is the added complexity
> of having two chunk formats worth it?  You already reduced the overhead by
> a factor of 4096 with normal chunks ... how often are extended chunks used
> and how much more efficient are they than having several normal chunks?
>

Right, chunk_ext may be rarely used, thanks. I will remove chunk_ext if 
there is no objection from others.

Best,
Wei