[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d6e3d6b2-e6fd-c0ae-db17-2218770ce4ed@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 15:33:38 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
"Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: Scalable memslots implementation
On 03/02/21 14:52, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>
>> However, note that the TDP MMU does not need an rmap at all. Since that
>> one is getting ready to become the default, the benefits of working on
>> the rmap would be quite small and only affect nested virtualization.
>
> Right, but we currently always have to allocate it.
>
> 8 bytes per 4k page, 8 bytes per 2M page, 8 bytes per 1G page.
>
> The 4k part alone is 0.2% of the memblock size.
>
> For a 1 TB memslot we might "waste" > 2 GB on rmap arrays.
>
> (that's why I am asking :) )
Yes, we're in violent agreement. :) I mean that the simplest solution
would be to allocate it lazily when building a non-TDP root.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists