From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Cathy Avery <cavery@redhat.com>, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
vkuznets@redhat.com, wei.huang2@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: nSVM: Optimize L12 to L2 vmcb.save copies
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 15:18:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2af5432a-6385-b32e-a69d-edfdccd7273b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9c7e4dec-2181-1720-5981-3ae25c5bb0d9@redhat.com>
On 02/03/21 13:56, Cathy Avery wrote:
> On 3/1/21 7:59 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 01, 2021, Cathy Avery wrote:
> svm->nested.vmcb12_gpa = 0;
> + svm->nested.last_vmcb12_gpa = 0;
This should not be 0 to avoid a false match. "-1" should be okay.
>>> kvm_set_rflags(&svm->vcpu, vmcb12->save.rflags |
>>> X86_EFLAGS_FIXED);
>>> svm_set_efer(&svm->vcpu, vmcb12->save.efer);
>>> svm_set_cr0(&svm->vcpu, vmcb12->save.cr0);
>>> svm_set_cr4(&svm->vcpu, vmcb12->save.cr4);
>> Why not utilize VMCB_CR?
> I was going to tackle CR in a follow up patch. I should have mentioned
> that but it makes sense to go ahead and do it now.
There is some trickiness. For example, I would first prefer to move the
checks on svm->vmcb->save.cr0 == vcpu->arch.cr0 ("hcr0 == cr0" in
svm_set_cr0) to recalc_intercepts.
For cr4, instead, we need to go through kvm_update_cpuid_runtime in case
host CR4 is not equal to CR4 (for which we have a testcase in svm.flat
already, I think).
>>> - svm->vcpu.arch.cr2 = vmcb12->save.cr2;
>>> + svm->vmcb->save.cr2 = svm->vcpu.arch.cr2 = vmcb12->save.cr2;
>> Same question for VMCB_CR2.
>>
>> Also, isn't writing svm->vmcb->save.cr2 unnecessary since svm_vcpu_run()
>> unconditionally writes it?
>>
>> Alternatively, it shouldn't be too much work to add proper dirty
>> tracking for CR2. VMX has to write the real CR2 every time because there's no VMCS
>> field, but I assume can avoid the write and dirty update on the majority of
>> VMRUNs.
>
> I'll take a look at CR2 as well.
That's a separate patch, to some extent unrelated to nesting. Feel free
to look at it, but for now we should apply this part with only the
svm->vmcb->save.cr2 assignment removed. Please send a v2, thanks!
Paolo
> Thanks for the feedback,
>
> Cathy
>
>>
>>> +
>>> kvm_rax_write(&svm->vcpu, vmcb12->save.rax);
>>> kvm_rsp_write(&svm->vcpu, vmcb12->save.rsp);
>>> kvm_rip_write(&svm->vcpu, vmcb12->save.rip);
>>> /* In case we don't even reach vcpu_run, the fields are not
>>> updated */
>>> - svm->vmcb->save.cr2 = svm->vcpu.arch.cr2;
>>> svm->vmcb->save.rax = vmcb12->save.rax;
>>> svm->vmcb->save.rsp = vmcb12->save.rsp;
>>> svm->vmcb->save.rip = vmcb12->save.rip;
>>> - svm->vmcb->save.dr7 = vmcb12->save.dr7 | DR7_FIXED_1;
>>> - svm->vcpu.arch.dr6 = vmcb12->save.dr6 | DR6_ACTIVE_LOW;
>>> - vmcb_mark_dirty(svm->vmcb, VMCB_DR);
>>> + /* These bits will be set properly on the first execution when
>>> new_vmc12 is true */
>>> + if (unlikely(new_vmcb12 || vmcb_is_dirty(vmcb12, VMCB_DR))) {
>>> + svm->vmcb->save.dr7 = vmcb12->save.dr7 | DR7_FIXED_1;
>>> + svm->vcpu.arch.dr6 = vmcb12->save.dr6 | DR6_ACTIVE_LOW;
>>> + vmcb_mark_dirty(svm->vmcb, VMCB_DR);
>>> + }
>>> }
>>> static void nested_vmcb02_prepare_control(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
>>> index 54610270f66a..9761a7ca8100 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
>>> @@ -1232,6 +1232,7 @@ static void init_vmcb(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> svm->asid = 0;
>>> svm->nested.vmcb12_gpa = 0;
>>> + svm->nested.last_vmcb12_gpa = 0;
>> We should use INVALID_PAGE, '0' is a legal physical address and could
>> theoretically get a false negative on the "new_vmcb12" check.
>>
>>> vcpu->arch.hflags = 0;
>>> if (!kvm_pause_in_guest(vcpu->kvm)) {
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
>>> index fbbb26dd0f73..911868d4584c 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.h
>>> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ struct svm_nested_state {
>>> u64 hsave_msr;
>>> u64 vm_cr_msr;
>>> u64 vmcb12_gpa;
>>> + u64 last_vmcb12_gpa;
>>> /* These are the merged vectors */
>>> u32 *msrpm;
>>> @@ -247,6 +248,11 @@ static inline void vmcb_mark_dirty(struct vmcb
>>> *vmcb, int bit)
>>> vmcb->control.clean &= ~(1 << bit);
>>> }
>>> +static inline bool vmcb_is_dirty(struct vmcb *vmcb, int bit)
>>> +{
>>> + return !test_bit(bit, (unsigned long *)&vmcb->control.clean);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static inline struct vcpu_svm *to_svm(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> {
>>> return container_of(vcpu, struct vcpu_svm, vcpu);
>>> --
>>> 2.26.2
>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-02 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-01 20:08 Cathy Avery
2021-03-02 0:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-03-02 12:56 ` Cathy Avery
2021-03-02 14:18 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2021-03-02 14:20 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=2af5432a-6385-b32e-a69d-edfdccd7273b@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=cavery@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wei.huang2@amd.com \
/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®