Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753273AbaFDNMH (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2014 09:12:07 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com ([209.85.215.47]:34991 "EHLO mail-la0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752591AbaFDNMF (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2014 09:12:05 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 15:11:59 +0200 From: Christoffer Dall To: Jungseok Lee Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Catalin.Marinas@arm.com, "'Marc Zyngier'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "'linux-samsung-soc'" , steve.capper@linaro.org, sungjinn.chung@samsung.com, "'Arnd Bergmann'" , kgene.kim@samsung.com, ilho215.lee@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/7] arm64: KVM: Set physical address size related factors in runtime Message-ID: <20140604131159.GB19587@lvm> References: <000501cf6dc6$44fac0f0$cef042d0$@samsung.com> <20140527135349.GJ31431@lvm> <20140527140241.GA13967@lvm> <07fe01cf7e3a$47d4e010$d77ea030$@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <07fe01cf7e3a$47d4e010$d77ea030$@samsung.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 05:11:39PM +0900, Jungseok Lee wrote: > On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:03 PM, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 03:53:49PM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 06:40:54PM +0900, Jungseok Lee wrote: > > > > This patch sets TCR_EL2.PS, VTCR_EL2.T0SZ and vttbr_baddr_mask in runtime, > > > > not compile time. > > > > > > > > In ARMv8, EL2 physical address size (TCR_EL2.PS) and stage2 input address > > > > size (VTCR_EL2.T0SZE) cannot be determined in compile time since they > > > > depends on hardware capability. > > > > > > s/depends/depend/ > > > > > > > > > > > According to Table D4-23 and Table D4-25 in ARM DDI 0487A.b document, > > > > vttbr_x is calculated using different hard-coded values with consideration > > > > > > super nit: I guess this is fixed values, and not hard-coded values > > > > > > > of T0SZ, granule size and the level of translation tables. Therefore, > > > > vttbr_baddr_mask should be determined dynamically. > > > > > > so I think there's a deeper issue here, which is that we're not > > > currently considering that for a given supported physical address size > > > (run-time) and given page granularity (compile-time), we may have some > > > flexibility in choosing the VTCR_EL2.SL0 field, and thereby the size of > > > the initial stage2 pgd, by concatinating the initial level page tables. > > > > > > Additionally, the combinations of the givens may also force us to choose > > > a specific SL0 value. > > > > > > Policy-wise, I would say we should concatenate as many initial level page > > > tables as possible when using 4K pages, iow. always set VTCR_EL2.SL0 to > > > the lowest possible value given the PARange and page size config we have > > > at hand. That should always provide increased performance for VMs at > > > the cost of maximum 16 concatenated tables, which is a 64K contiguous > > > allocation and alignment, for 4K pages. > > > > > > For 64K pages, it becomes a 256K alignment and contiguous allocation > > > requirement. One could argue that if this is not possible on your > > > system, then you have no business runninng VMs on there, but I want to > > > leave this open for comments... > > > > > Just had a brief chat with Marc, and he made me think of the fact that > > we cannot decide this freely, because the code in kvm_mmu.c assumes that > > the stage-2 page tables have the same number of levels etc. as the host > > kernel (we re-use functions like pud_offset, pud_addr_end, etc. etc.). > > > > I'm not sure this can always be aligned, so we may have to write our own > > kvm_... versions of these to accomodate the best policy for KVM. > > I agree with your opinion in performance and long-term perspective. We > should consider all combinations and re-write code if needed. > > However, I'm not sure that this work should be included in this patch series. > > If this functionality is needed, it would be good to prepare the work as > a separate patchset and drop off the last 2 KVM patches. Instead, 4 level > features should be marked as EXPERIMENTAL. > If you want to get the 4-level page tables merged earlier you should make sure KVM gets disabled when this feature is enabled, but it would be a bit of shame now that you're already worked a lot on this code. I would be very happy to see patches from you fixing this properly, but I understand it is developing into something of an effort. -Christoffer -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/