linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86/pmu: Reduce counter period change overhead and delay the effective time

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c5e4723a-3136-e017-5997-77f56c4c27c1@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 22:41:57 +0800
From:   Like Xu <like.xu@...ux.intel.com>
To:     pbonzini@...hat.com
Cc:     ehankland@...gle.com, jmattson@...gle.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, wanpengli@...cent.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86/pmu: Reduce counter period change overhead
 and delay the effective time

Ping.

On 2020/4/8 22:04, Like Xu wrote:
> Hi Paolo,
>
> Could you please take a look at this patch?
> If there is anything needs to be improved, please let me know.
>
> Thanks,
> Like Xu
>
> On 2020/3/26 20:47, Like Xu wrote:
>> Anyone to help review this change?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Like Xu
>>
>> On 2020/3/17 16:14, Like Xu wrote:
>>> The cost of perf_event_period() is unstable, and when the guest samples
>>> multiple events, the overhead increases dramatically (5378 ns on E5-2699).
>>>
>>> For a non-running counter, the effective time of the new period is when
>>> its corresponding enable bit is enabled. Calling perf_event_period()
>>> in advance is superfluous. For a running counter, it's safe to delay the
>>> effective time until the KVM_REQ_PMU event is handled. If there are
>>> multiple perf_event_period() calls before handling KVM_REQ_PMU,
>>> it helps to reduce the total cost.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Like Xu <like.xu@...ux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c           | 11 -----------
>>>   arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h           | 11 +++++++++++
>>>   arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c | 10 ++++------
>>>   3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
>>> index d1f8ca57d354..527a8bb85080 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
>>> @@ -437,17 +437,6 @@ void kvm_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>       kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu);
>>>   }
>>> -static inline bool pmc_speculative_in_use(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
>>> -{
>>> -    struct kvm_pmu *pmu = pmc_to_pmu(pmc);
>>> -
>>> -    if (pmc_is_fixed(pmc))
>>> -        return fixed_ctrl_field(pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl,
>>> -            pmc->idx - INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED) & 0x3;
>>> -
>>> -    return pmc->eventsel & ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
>>> -}
>>> -
>>>   /* Release perf_events for vPMCs that have been unused for a full 
>>> time slice.  */
>>>   void kvm_pmu_cleanup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>   {
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
>>> index d7da2b9e0755..cd112e825d2c 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
>>> @@ -138,6 +138,17 @@ static inline u64 get_sample_period(struct kvm_pmc 
>>> *pmc, u64 counter_value)
>>>       return sample_period;
>>>   }
>>> +static inline bool pmc_speculative_in_use(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct kvm_pmu *pmu = pmc_to_pmu(pmc);
>>> +
>>> +    if (pmc_is_fixed(pmc))
>>> +        return fixed_ctrl_field(pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl,
>>> +            pmc->idx - INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED) & 0x3;
>>> +
>>> +    return pmc->eventsel & ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>   void reprogram_gp_counter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc, u64 eventsel);
>>>   void reprogram_fixed_counter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc, u8 ctrl, int 
>>> fixed_idx);
>>>   void reprogram_counter(struct kvm_pmu *pmu, int pmc_idx);
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c
>>> index 7c857737b438..20f654a0c09b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.c
>>> @@ -263,15 +263,13 @@ static int intel_pmu_set_msr(struct kvm_vcpu 
>>> *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
>>>               if (!msr_info->host_initiated)
>>>                   data = (s64)(s32)data;
>>>               pmc->counter += data - pmc_read_counter(pmc);
>>> -            if (pmc->perf_event)
>>> -                perf_event_period(pmc->perf_event,
>>> -                          get_sample_period(pmc, data));
>>> +            if (pmc_speculative_in_use(pmc))
>>> +                kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_PMU, vcpu);
>>>               return 0;
>>>           } else if ((pmc = get_fixed_pmc(pmu, msr))) {
>>>               pmc->counter += data - pmc_read_counter(pmc);
>>> -            if (pmc->perf_event)
>>> -                perf_event_period(pmc->perf_event,
>>> -                          get_sample_period(pmc, data));
>>> +            if (pmc_speculative_in_use(pmc))
>>> +                kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_PMU, vcpu);
>>>               return 0;
>>>           } else if ((pmc = get_gp_pmc(pmu, msr, MSR_P6_EVNTSEL0))) {
>>>               if (data == pmc->eventsel)
>>>
>>
>