[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZrzAlchCZx0ptSfR@google.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 07:35:01 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>, Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, x86@...nel.org,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/19] mm: Support huge pfnmaps
On Wed, Aug 14, 2024, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 12:08:50PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > Overview
> > ========
> >
> > This series is based on mm-unstable, commit 98808d08fc0f of Aug 7th latest,
> > plus dax 1g fix [1]. Note that this series should also apply if without
> > the dax 1g fix series, but when without it, mprotect() will trigger similar
> > errors otherwise on PUD mappings.
> >
> > This series implements huge pfnmaps support for mm in general. Huge pfnmap
> > allows e.g. VM_PFNMAP vmas to map in either PMD or PUD levels, similar to
> > what we do with dax / thp / hugetlb so far to benefit from TLB hits. Now
> > we extend that idea to PFN mappings, e.g. PCI MMIO bars where it can grow
> > as large as 8GB or even bigger.
>
> FWIW, I've started to hear people talk about needing this in the VFIO
> context with VMs.
>
> vfio/iommufd will reassemble the contiguous range from the 4k PFNs to
> setup the IOMMU, but KVM is not able to do it so reliably.
Heh, KVM should very reliably do the exact opposite, i.e. KVM should never create
a huge page unless the mapping is huge in the primary MMU. And that's very much
by design, as KVM has no knowledge of what actually resides at a given PFN, and
thus can't determine whether or not its safe to create a huge page if KVM happens
to realize the VM has access to a contiguous range of memory.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists