[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180806190321-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 19:06:05 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
robh@...nel.org, srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, aik@...abs.ru,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, linuxram@...ibm.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, paulus@...ba.org,
joe@...ches.com, david@...son.dropbear.id.au,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net,
haren@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] Virtio uses DMA API for all devices
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 08:24:06AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 04:36:43PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 02:32:28PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> > > On 08/05/2018 05:54 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 08:21:26PM -0500, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > >> On Fri, 2018-08-03 at 22:08 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > >>>>>> Please go through these patches and review whether this approach broadly
> > > >>>>>> makes sense. I will appreciate suggestions, inputs, comments regarding
> > > >>>>>> the patches or the approach in general. Thank you.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Jason did some work on profiling this. Unfortunately he reports
> > > >>>>> about 4% extra overhead from this switch on x86 with no vIOMMU.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The test is rather simple, just run pktgen (pktgen_sample01_simple.sh) in
> > > >>>> guest and measure PPS on tap on host.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thanks
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Could you supply host configuration involved please?
> > > >>
> > > >> I wonder how much of that could be caused by Spectre mitigations
> > > >> blowing up indirect function calls...
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Ben.
> > > >
> > > > I won't be surprised. If yes I suggested a way to mitigate the overhead.
> > >
> > > Did we get better results (lower regression due to indirect calls) with
> > > the suggested mitigation ? Just curious.
> >
> > I'm referring to this:
> > I wonder whether we can support map_sg and friends being NULL, then use
> > that when mapping is an identity. A conditional branch there is likely
> > very cheap.
> >
> > I don't think anyone tried implementing this yes.
>
> I've done something very similar in the thread I posted a few years
> ago.
Right so that was before spectre where a virtual call was cheaper :(
> I plan to get a version of that upstream for 4.20, but it won't
> cover the virtio case, just the real direct mapping.
I guess this RFC will have to be reworked on top and performance retested.
Thanks,
--
MST
Powered by blists - more mailing lists