Message-ID: <20190311234956-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:50:47 -0400
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:     Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterx@...hat.com,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 5/5] vhost: access vq metadata through kernel
 virtual address

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:52:15AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2019/3/11 下午8:48, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 03:40:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > On 2019/3/9 上午3:48, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > > > Hello Jeson,
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > > Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do
> > > > > you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace
> > > > > pages to kenrel) or it can be done by this series (only about three 4K
> > > > > pages were vmapped per virtqueue)?
> > > > When I answered about the advantages of mmu notifier and I mentioned
> > > > guaranteed 2m/gigapages where available, I overlooked the detail you
> > > > were using vmap instead of kmap. So with vmap you're actually doing
> > > > the opposite, it slows down the access because it will always use a 4k
> > > > TLB even if QEMU runs on THP or gigapages hugetlbfs.
> > > > 
> > > > If there's just one page (or a few pages) in each vmap there's no need
> > > > of vmap, the linearity vmap provides doesn't pay off in such
> > > > case.
> > > > 
> > > > So likely there's further room for improvement here that you can
> > > > achieve in the current series by just dropping vmap/vunmap.
> > > > 
> > > > You can just use kmap (or kmap_atomic if you're in preemptible
> > > > section, should work from bh/irq).
> > > > 
> > > > In short the mmu notifier to invalidate only sets a "struct page *
> > > > userringpage" pointer to NULL without calls to vunmap.
> > > > 
> > > > In all cases immediately after gup_fast returns you can always call
> > > > put_page immediately (which explains why I'd like an option to drop
> > > > FOLL_GET from gup_fast to speed it up).
> > > > 
> > > > Then you can check the sequence_counter and inc/dec counter increased
> > > > by _start/_end. That will tell you if the page you got and you called
> > > > put_page to immediately unpin it or even to free it, cannot go away
> > > > under you until the invalidate is called.
> > > > 
> > > > If sequence counters and counter tells that gup_fast raced with anyt
> > > > mmu notifier invalidate you can just repeat gup_fast. Otherwise you're
> > > > done, the page cannot go away under you, the host virtual to host
> > > > physical mapping cannot change either. And the page is not pinned
> > > > either. So you can just set the "struct page * userringpage = page"
> > > > where "page" was the one setup by gup_fast.
> > > > 
> > > > When later the invalidate runs, you can just call set_page_dirty if
> > > > gup_fast was called with "write = 1" and then you clear the pointer
> > > > "userringpage = NULL".
> > > > 
> > > > When you need to read/write to the memory
> > > > kmap/kmap_atomic(userringpage) should work.
> > > Yes, I've considered kmap() from the start. The reason I don't do that is
> > > large virtqueue may need more than one page so VA might not be contiguous.
> > > But this is probably not a big issue which just need more tricks in the
> > > vhost memory accessors.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > In short because there's no hardware involvement here, the established
> > > > mapping is just the pointer to the page, there is no need of setting
> > > > up any pagetables or to do any TLB flushes (except on 32bit archs if
> > > > the page is above the direct mapping but it never happens on 64bit
> > > > archs).
> > > I see, I believe we don't care much about the performance of 32bit archs (or
> > > we can just fallback to copy_to_user() friends).
> > Using copyXuser is better I guess.
> 
> 
> Ok.
> 
> 
> > 
> > > Using direct mapping (I
> > > guess kernel will always try hugepage for that?) should be better and we can
> > > even use it for the data transfer not only for the metadata.
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > We can't really. The big issue is get user pages. Doing that on data
> > path will be slower than copyXuser.
> 
> 
> I meant if we can find a way to avoid doing gup in datapath. E.g vhost
> maintain a range tree and add or remove ranges through MMU notifier. Then in
> datapath, if we find the range, then use direct mapping otherwise
> copy_to_user().
> 
> Thanks

We can try. But I'm not sure there's any reason to think there's any
locality there.

> 
> >   Or maybe it won't with the
> > amount of mitigations spread around. Go ahead and try.
> > 
> > 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists