From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Vitaly Kuznetsov" <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<x86@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kas@kernel.org>,
"Xin Li (Intel)" <xin@zytor.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
"Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@linutronix.de>,
"open list:KVM PARAVIRT (KVM/paravirt)" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] kvm: x86: implement PV send_IPI method
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 20:19:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aHo7vRrul0aQqrpK@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACGkMEvNaKgF7bOPUahaYMi6n2vijAXwFvAhQ22LecZGSC-_bg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 07:15:37PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 7:01 PM Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 03:52:30PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> >On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 2:25 PM Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>> >>
>> >> We used to have PV version of send_IPI_mask and
>> >> send_IPI_mask_allbutself. This patch implements PV send_IPI method to
>> >> reduce the number of vmexits.
>>
>> It won't reduce the number of VM-exits; in fact, it may increase them on CPUs
>> that support IPI virtualization.
>
>Sure, but I wonder if it reduces the vmexits when there's no APICV or
>L2 VM. I thought it can reduce the 2 vmexits to 1?
Even without APICv, there is just 1 vmexit due to APIC write (xAPIC mode)
or MSR write (x2APIC mode).
>
>>
>> With IPI virtualization enabled, *unicast* and physical-addressing IPIs won't
>> cause a VM-exit.
>
>Right.
>
>> Instead, the microcode posts interrupts directly to the target
>> vCPU. The PV version always causes a VM-exit.
>
>Yes, but it applies to all PV IPI I think.
For multi-cast IPIs, a single hypercall (PV IPI) outperforms multiple ICR
writes, even when IPI virtualization is enabled.
>
>>
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>> >> Tested-by: Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com>
>> >
>> >I think a question here is are we able to see performance improvement
>> >in any kind of setup?
>>
>> It may result in a negative performance impact.
>
>Userspace can check and enable PV IPI for the case where it suits.
Yeah, we need to identify the cases. One example may be for TDX guests, using
a PV approach (TDVMCALL) can avoid the #VE cost.
>
>For example, HyperV did something like:
>
>void __init hv_apic_init(void)
>{
> if (ms_hyperv.hints & HV_X64_CLUSTER_IPI_RECOMMENDED) {
> pr_info("Hyper-V: Using IPI hypercalls\n");
> /*
> * Set the IPI entry points.
> */
> orig_apic = *apic;
>
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI, hv_send_ipi);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_mask, hv_send_ipi_mask);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_mask_allbutself,
>hv_send_ipi_mask_allbutself);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_allbutself,
>hv_send_ipi_allbutself);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_all, hv_send_ipi_all);
> apic_update_callback(send_IPI_self, hv_send_ipi_self);
>}
>
>send_IPI_mask is there.
>
>Thanks
>
>>
>> >
>> >Thanks
>> >
>> >
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-18 12:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-18 6:24 Cindy Lu
2025-07-18 7:52 ` Jason Wang
2025-07-18 11:00 ` Chao Gao
2025-07-18 11:15 ` Jason Wang
2025-07-18 12:19 ` Chao Gao [this message]
2025-07-18 14:01 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-18 15:15 ` Chao Gao
2025-07-18 15:22 ` Sean Christopherson
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=aHo7vRrul0aQqrpK@intel.com \
--to=chao.gao@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=darwi@linutronix.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lulu@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xin@zytor.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®