linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v4 00/16] kvm/arm: Align the VMID allocation with the arm64 ASID one

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: <acb761853cb1494a9eb2c345ddd9afd4@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Apr 2021 08:31:06 +0000
From:   Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>
To:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
CC:     "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>,
        "catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        "james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>,
        "julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com" <julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com>,
        "suzuki.poulose@....com" <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        "jean-philippe@...aro.org" <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        "julien@....org" <julien@....org>, Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 00/16] kvm/arm: Align the VMID allocation with the
 arm64 ASID one



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Will Deacon [mailto:will@...nel.org]
> Sent: 22 April 2021 18:09
> To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu;
> linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; maz@...nel.org; catalin.marinas@....com;
> james.morse@....com; julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com;
> suzuki.poulose@....com; jean-philippe@...aro.org; julien@....org; Linuxarm
> <linuxarm@...wei.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/16] kvm/arm: Align the VMID allocation with the
> arm64 ASID one
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 12:22:56PM +0100, Shameer Kolothum wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is an attempt to revive this series originally posted by
> > Julien Grall[1]. The main motive to work on this now is because
> > of the requirement to have Pinned KVM VMIDs and the RFC discussion
> > for the same basically suggested[2] to have a common/better vmid
> > allocator for KVM which this series provides.
> >
> > Major Changes from v3:
> >
> > -Changes related to Pinned ASID support.
> > -Changes to take care KPTI related bits reservation.
> > -Dropped support for 32 bit KVM.
> > -Rebase to 5.12-rc7
> >
> > Individual patches have change history for any major changes
> > from v3.
> >
> > Tests were performed on a HiSilicon D06 platform and so far not observed
> > any regressions.
> >
> > For ASID allocation,
> >
> > Avg of 10 runs(hackbench -s 512 -l 200 -g 300 -f 25 -P),
> > 5.12-rc7: Time:18.8119
> > 5.12-rc7+v4: Time: 18.459
> >
> > ~1.8% improvement.
> >
> > For KVM VMID,
> >
> > The measurement was made with maxcpus set to 8 and with the
> > number of VMID limited to 4-bit. The test involves running
> > concurrently 40 guests with 2 vCPUs. Each guest will then
> > execute hackbench 5 times before exiting.
> >
> > The performance difference between the current algo and the
> > new one are(ag. of 10 runs):
> >     - 1.9% less exit from the guest
> >     - 0.7% faster
> >
> > For complete series, please see,
> >  https://github.com/hisilicon/kernel-dev/tree/private-v5.12-rc7-asid-v4
> >
> > Please take a look and let me know your feedback.
> 
> Although I think aligning the two algorithms makes sense, I'm not completely
> sold on the need to abstract all this into a library and whether the
> additional indirection is justified.
> 
> It would be great to compare this approach with one where portions of the
> code are duplicated into a separate VMID allocator. Have you tried that to
> see what it looks like? Doesn't need to be a proper patch set, but comparing
> the end result might help to evaluate the proposal here.

Ok. I will give it a go and get back.

Thanks,
Shameer