[PATCH 0/8] KVM/ARM: Guest Entry/Exit optimizations
Marc Zyngier
marc.zyngier at arm.com
Wed Feb 10 04:24:06 PST 2016
On 10/02/16 12:02, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 08:34:21AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 09/02/16 20:59, Christoffer Dall wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 11:40:14AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>> I've recently been looking at our entry/exit costs, and profiling
>>>> figures did show some very low hanging fruits.
>>>>
>>>> The most obvious cost is that accessing the GIC HW is slow. As in
>>>> "deadly slow", specially when GICv2 is involved. So not hammering the
>>>> HW when there is nothing to write is immediately beneficial, as this
>>>> is the most common cases (whatever people seem to think, interrupts
>>>> are a *rare* event).
>>>>
>>>> Another easy thing to fix is the way we handle trapped system
>>>> registers. We do insist on (mostly) sorting them, but we do perform a
>>>> linear search on trap. We can switch to a binary search for free, and
>>>> get immediate benefits (the PMU code, being extremely trap-happy,
>>>> benefits immediately from this).
>>>>
>>>> With these in place, I see an improvement of 20 to 30% (depending on
>>>> the platform) on our world-switch cycle count when running a set of
>>>> hand-crafted guests that are designed to only perform traps.
>>>
>>> I'm curious about the weight of these two? My guess based on the
>>> measurement work I did is that the GIC is by far the worst sinner, but
>>> that was exacerbated on X-Gene compared to Seattle.
>>
>> Indeed, the GIC is the real pig. 80% of the benefit is provided by not
>> accessing it when not absolutely required. The sysreg access is only
>> visible for workloads that are extremely trap-happy, but that's what
>> happens with as soon as you start exercising the PMU code.
>>
>>>>
>>>> Methodology:
>>>>
>>>> * NULL-hypercall guest: Perform 65536 PSCI_0_2_FN_PSCI_VERSION calls,
>>>> and then a power-off:
>>>>
>>>> __start:
>>>> mov x19, #(1 << 16)
>>>> 1: mov x0, #0x84000000
>>>> hvc #0
>>>> sub x19, x19, #1
>>>> cbnz x19, 1b
>>>> mov x0, #0x84000000
>>>> add x0, x0, #9
>>>> hvc #0
>>>> b .
>>>>
>>>> * sysreg trap guest: Perform 2^20 PMSELR_EL0 accesses, and power-off:
>>>>
>>>> __start:
>>>> mov x19, #(1 << 20)
>>>> 1: mrs x0, PMSELR_EL0
>>>> sub x19, x19, #1
>>>> cbnz x19, 1b
>>>> mov x0, #0x84000000
>>>> add x0, x0, #9
>>>> hvc #0
>>>> b .
>>>>
>>>> * These guests are profiled using perf and kvmtool:
>>>>
>>>> taskset -c 1 perf stat -e cycles:kh lkvm run -c1 --kernel do_sysreg.bin 2>&1 >/dev/null| grep cycles
>>>
>>> these would be good to add to kvm-unit-tests so we can keep an eye on
>>> this sort of thing...
>
> I can work on that. (Actually I already had put this on my TODO when I
> saw this series. Your interest in it just bumped it up in priority :-)
Ah! You're in charge, then! ;-)
>>
>> Yeah, I was thinking of that too. In the meantime, I've also created a
>> GICv2 self-IPI test case, which has led to further improvement (a 10%
>> reduction in the number of cycles on Seattle). The ugly thing about that
>> test is that it knows where kvmtool places the GIC (I didn't fancy
>> parsing the DT in assembly code). Hopefully there is a way to abstract this.
>
> I have a simple IPI test written for kvm-unit-tests already[*], but it's
> been laying around for a while. I can dust it off and make a self-IPI
> test out of it yet today though. I've been hesitating to post any gic
> related stuff to kvm-unit-tests, because I know Andre has been looking
> into it (and he has the gic expertise to do it more cleanly than I). I'll
> go ahead and post my little thing now though, as he can always review it
> and/or clean it up later :-)
>
> [*] https://github.com/rhdrjones/kvm-unit-tests/commit/05af9b0361ac5eab58f46e5451e585c9625c3b75
For the record, the test case I've been running is this:
__start:
mov x19, #(1 << 20)
mov x0, #0x3fff0000 // Dist
mov x1, #0x3ffd0000 // CPU
mov w2, #1
str w2, [x0] // Enable Group0
ldr w2, =0xa0a0a0a0
str w2, [x0, 0x400] // A0 priority for SGI0-3
mov w2, #0x0f
str w2, [x0, #0x100] // Enable SGI0-3
mov w2, #0xf0
str w2, [x1, #4] // PMR
mov w2, #1
str w2, [x1] // Enable CPU interface
1:
mov w2, #(2 << 24) // Interrupt self with SGI0
str w2, [x0, #0xf00]
2: ldr w2, [x1, #0x0c] // GICC_IAR
cmp w2, #0x3ff
b.ne 3f
wfi
b 2b
3: str w2, [x1, #0x10] // EOI
sub x19, x19, #1
cbnz x19, 1b
// Die
mov x0, #0x84000000
add x0, x0, #9
hvc #0
b .
Feel free to adapt it so it fits in your framework if you find it useful
(but I guess you'll be inclined to rewrite it in C).
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list