[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20211009021236.4122790-37-seanjc@google.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 19:12:29 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>,
Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com>,
Jing Zhang <jingzhangos@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 36/43] KVM: SVM: Don't bother checking for "running" AVIC
when kicking for IPIs
Drop the avic_vcpu_is_running() check when waking vCPUs in response to a
VM-Exit due to incomplete IPI delivery. The check isn't wrong per se, but
it's not 100% accurate in the sense that it doesn't guarantee that the vCPU
was one of the vCPUs that didn't receive the IPI.
The check isn't required for correctness as blocking == !running in this
context.
>From a performance perspective, waking a live task is not expensive as the
only moderately costly operation is a locked operation to temporarily
disable preemption. And if that is indeed a performance issue,
kvm_vcpu_is_blocking() would be a better check than poking into the AVIC.
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
---
arch/x86/kvm/svm/avic.c | 15 +++++++++------
arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h | 11 -----------
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/avic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/avic.c
index cbf02e7e20d0..b43b05610ade 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/avic.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/avic.c
@@ -295,13 +295,16 @@ static void avic_kick_target_vcpus(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_lapic *source,
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
int i;
+ /*
+ * Wake any target vCPUs that are blocking, i.e. waiting for a wake
+ * event. There's no need to signal doorbells, as hardware has handled
+ * vCPUs that were in guest at the time of the IPI, and vCPUs that have
+ * since entered the guest will have processed pending IRQs at VMRUN.
+ */
kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
- bool m = kvm_apic_match_dest(vcpu, source,
- icrl & APIC_SHORT_MASK,
- GET_APIC_DEST_FIELD(icrh),
- icrl & APIC_DEST_MASK);
-
- if (m && !avic_vcpu_is_running(vcpu))
+ if (kvm_apic_match_dest(vcpu, source, icrl & APIC_SHORT_MASK,
+ GET_APIC_DEST_FIELD(icrh),
+ icrl & APIC_DEST_MASK))
kvm_vcpu_wake_up(vcpu);
}
}
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
index 0d7bbe548ac3..7f5b01bbee29 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
@@ -509,17 +509,6 @@ extern struct kvm_x86_nested_ops svm_nested_ops;
#define VMCB_AVIC_APIC_BAR_MASK 0xFFFFFFFFFF000ULL
-static inline bool avic_vcpu_is_running(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
-{
- struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
- u64 *entry = svm->avic_physical_id_cache;
-
- if (!entry)
- return false;
-
- return (READ_ONCE(*entry) & AVIC_PHYSICAL_ID_ENTRY_IS_RUNNING_MASK);
-}
-
int avic_ga_log_notifier(u32 ga_tag);
void avic_vm_destroy(struct kvm *kvm);
int avic_vm_init(struct kvm *kvm);
--
2.33.0.882.g93a45727a2-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists