From: "Carlos López" <clopez@suse.de>
To: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, seanjc@google.com,
pbonzini@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@kernel.org,
peterx@redhat.com, ljs@kernel.org, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com,
borntraeger@linux.ibm.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com,
"Carlos López" <clopez@suse.de>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@kernel.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org (maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)),
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 8/9] KVM: x86/mmu: don't zap secondary MMU on permission upgrade
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2026 17:50:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261105165004.2663799-12-clopez@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261105165004.2663799-4-clopez@suse.de>
When an mmu_notifier invalidation only upgrades permissions
(MMU_NOTIFIER_RANGE_PERM_UPGRADE), keep the existing SPTEs instead of
zapping them. The PFN is unchanged and no access is revoked, so an
existing SPTE is no more permissive than the new host PTE. Permissions
for the SPTE are updated on the next fault, so dropping them early
gains nothing.
The motivating case is a userfaultfd-wp dirty tracker such as QEMU's
background snapshot, which unprotects every guest page as it saves it.
Zapping on each unprotect makes the guest refault its whole working
set. On a 64GB guest under a background snapshot, a read-mostly workload
drops secondary-MMU refaults from ~1M/s to ~2.5K/s and cross-vCPU TLB
shootdowns from ~1400/s to near zero. Uses of mprotect() that only add
access benefit likewise.
Note that this also skips the APIC-access page reload, which is not
needed as the page's PFN is unchanged. KVM does not retry a failed
reload, but that issue is pre-existing and unrelated to this change.
Signed-off-by: Carlos López <clopez@suse.de>
---
arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
index f89e9f8a6cc2..3c92379bdbe0 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
@@ -1719,6 +1719,13 @@ bool kvm_unmap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_gfn_range *range)
lockdep_assert_once(kvm->mmu_invalidate_in_progress ||
lockdep_is_held(&kvm->slots_lock));
+ /*
+ * Do not bother zapping SPTEs if this is only a protection upgrade.
+ * Permissions will be faulted-in on demand.
+ */
+ if (range->flags & MMU_NOTIFIER_RANGE_PERM_UPGRADE)
+ return false;
+
if (kvm_memslots_have_rmaps(kvm))
flush = __kvm_rmap_zap_gfn_range(kvm, range->slot,
range->start, range->end,
--
2.51.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-05 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-05 16:49 [PATCH v2 0/9] KVM: " Carlos López
2026-11-05 16:49 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] mm: fix eager write-bit restore for write-notified shared mappings Carlos López
2026-11-05 16:49 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] riscv: mm: add pud_soft_dirty() Carlos López
2026-11-05 16:50 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] mm/huge_memory: honor MM_CP_TRY_CHANGE_WRITABLE in change_huge_pud() Carlos López
2026-11-05 16:50 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] mm/mprotect: add MM_CP_PERM_UPGRADE Carlos López
2026-11-05 16:50 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] mm/mprotect: keep writable entries writable on permission upgrades Carlos López
2026-11-05 17:06 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-11-05 16:50 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] mm/mmu_notifier: add MMU_NOTIFIER_RANGE_PERM_UPGRADE Carlos López
2026-11-05 16:50 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] KVM: pass the mmu_notifier event and flags to kvm_gfn_range Carlos López
2026-11-05 16:50 ` Carlos López [this message]
2026-11-05 16:50 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] KVM: s390: don't unmap the gmap on permission upgrade Carlos López
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261105165004.2663799-12-clopez@suse.de \
--to=clopez@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®