[PATCH v7 08/16] KVM: arm64: Optimise FPSIMD handling to reduce guest/host thrashing
Dave Martin
Dave.Martin at arm.com
Wed May 9 10:00:25 PDT 2018
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 05:54:25PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 09/05/18 17:12, Dave Martin wrote:
> > This patch refactors KVM to align the host and guest FPSIMD
> > save/restore logic with each other for arm64. This reduces the
> > number of redundant save/restore operations that must occur, and
> > reduces the common-case IRQ blackout time during guest exit storms
> > by saving the host state lazily and optimising away the need to
> > restore the host state before returning to the run loop.
> >
> > Four hooks are defined in order to enable this:
> >
> > * kvm_arch_vcpu_run_map_fp():
> > Called on PID change to map necessary bits of current to Hyp.
> >
> > * kvm_arch_vcpu_load_fp():
> > Set up FP/SIMD for entering the KVM run loop (parse as
> > "vcpu_load fp").
> >
> > * kvm_arch_vcpu_ctxsync_fp():
> > Get FP/SIMD into a safe state for re-enabling interrupts after a
> > guest exit back to the run loop.
> >
> > For arm64 specifically, this involves updating the host kernel's
> > FPSIMD context tracking metadata so that kernel-mode NEON use
> > will cause the vcpu's FPSIMD state to be saved back correctly
> > into the vcpu struct. This must be done before re-enabling
> > interrupts because kernel-mode NEON may be used by softirqs.
> >
> > * kvm_arch_vcpu_put_fp():
> > Save guest FP/SIMD state back to memory and dissociate from the
> > CPU ("vcpu_put fp").
> >
> > Also, the arm64 FPSIMD context switch code is updated to enable it
> > to save back FPSIMD state for a vcpu, not just current. A few
> > helpers drive this:
> >
> > * fpsimd_bind_state_to_cpu(struct user_fpsimd_state *fp):
> > mark this CPU as having context fp (which may belong to a vcpu)
> > currently loaded in its registers. This is the non-task
> > equivalent of the static function fpsimd_bind_to_cpu() in
> > fpsimd.c.
> >
> > * task_fpsimd_save():
> > exported to allow KVM to save the guest's FPSIMD state back to
> > memory on exit from the run loop.
> >
> > * fpsimd_flush_state():
> > invalidate any context's FPSIMD state that is currently loaded.
> > Used to disassociate the vcpu from the CPU regs on run loop exit.
> >
> > These changes allow the run loop to enable interrupts (and thus
> > softirqs that may use kernel-mode NEON) without having to save the
> > guest's FPSIMD state eagerly.
> >
> > Some new vcpu_arch fields are added to make all this work. Because
> > host FPSIMD state can now be saved back directly into current's
> > thread_struct as appropriate, host_cpu_context is no longer used
> > for preserving the FPSIMD state. However, it is still needed for
> > preserving other things such as the host's system registers. To
> > avoid ABI churn, the redundant storage space in host_cpu_context is
> > not removed for now.
> >
> > arch/arm is not addressed by this patch and continues to use its
> > current save/restore logic. It could provide implementations of
> > the helpers later if desired.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin at arm.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Dropped Reviewed-bys due to non-trivial changes.
> >
> > Changes since v6:
> >
> > * Don't define kvm_arch_vcpu_run_pid_change() unless CONFIG_KVM=y.
> >
> > <asm/kvm_host.h> may be used for its declarations even with
> > CONFIG_KVM=n (e.g., in asm-offsets.c).
> >
> > This patch avoids conflicts with the core headers in this config.
> >
> > * Rebind current's FP state to the cpu in vcpu_put() if it is
> > still loaded, to ensure that the SVE trapping setup for userspace is
> > properly restored.
> >
> > Requested by Marc Zyngier:
> >
> > * Add a comment to explain the purpose of update_fp_enabled().
> >
> > * Migrate vcpu_arch.flags definitions to kvm_host.h.
> >
> > * Eliminate magic NULL semantics for vcpu_arch.host_fpsimd_state so
> > that we can just assign this pointer once in the pid_change hook.
> >
> > A new flag KVM_ARM64_FP_HOST flag is added to capture the former
> > semantics of vcpu->arch.host_fpsimd_state != NULL.
> Thanks for the additional rework, that looks much better now.
>
> Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier at arm.com>
Cool, thanks for wrapping your head around it.
Cheers
---Dave
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list