Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932969AbcJLRtX (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Oct 2016 13:49:23 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38148 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755029AbcJLRtU (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Oct 2016 13:49:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 19:41:09 +0200 From: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= To: Wanpeng Li Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Yunhong Jiang , Wanpeng Li Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V2 2/2] KVM: x86: Support using the VMX preemption timer for APIC Timer periodic/oneshot mode Message-ID: <20161012174109.GF30525@potion> References: <1476255172-3357-1-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> <1476255172-3357-3-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1476255172-3357-3-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:41:12 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4832 Lines: 137 2016-10-12 14:52+0800, Wanpeng Li: > From: Wanpeng Li > > Most windows guests still utilize APIC Timer periodic/oneshot mode > instead of tsc-deadline mode, and the APIC Timer periodic/oneshot > mode are still emulated by high overhead hrtimer on host. This patch > converts the expected expire time of the periodic/oneshot mode to > guest deadline tsc in order to leverage VMX preemption timer logic > for APIC Timer tsc-deadline mode. > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini > Cc: Radim Krčmář > Cc: Yunhong Jiang > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li > --- > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c > @@ -1101,7 +1101,14 @@ static u32 apic_get_tmcct(struct kvm_lapic *apic) > apic->lapic_timer.period == 0) > return 0; > > - remaining = hrtimer_get_remaining(&apic->lapic_timer.timer); > + if (kvm_lapic_hv_timer_in_use(apic->vcpu)) { apic->lapic_timer.expired_period is set unconditionally, so the condition seems superfluous. > + ktime_t now; > + > + now = apic->lapic_timer.timer.base->get_time(); > + remaining = ktime_sub(apic->lapic_timer.expired_period, now); The name expired_period is weird for something that can be in the future ... maybe target_ns? > + } else > + remaining = hrtimer_get_remaining(&apic->lapic_timer.timer); > + > if (ktime_to_ns(remaining) < 0) > remaining = ktime_set(0, 0); > > @@ -1353,8 +1360,6 @@ static void start_sw_period(struct kvm_lapic *apic) > > /* lapic timer in oneshot or periodic mode */ > now = apic->lapic_timer.timer.base->get_time(); > - apic->lapic_timer.period = (u64)kvm_lapic_get_reg(apic, APIC_TMICT) > - * APIC_BUS_CYCLE_NS * apic->divide_count; I would gut start_sw_period() a bit more: the checking of minimal period is a bit misplaced, because it uses now() when the timer switched to hrtimers, but that could have been long after the timer was set, so we'd delay for no good reason. > if (!apic->lapic_timer.period) > return; Can this happen? (WARN_ONCE() if it is only a sanity check.) > @@ -1400,52 +1405,71 @@ bool kvm_lapic_hv_timer_in_use(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +void kvm_lapic_expired_hv_timer(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + struct kvm_lapic *apic = vcpu->arch.apic; > + > + WARN_ON(!apic->lapic_timer.hv_timer_in_use); > + WARN_ON(swait_active(&vcpu->wq)); > + cancel_hv_timer(apic); > + apic_timer_expired(apic); > + > + if (apic_lvtt_period(apic)) { > + ktime_t now; > + u64 tscl = rdtsc(); > + > + apic->lapic_timer.period = (u64)kvm_lapic_get_reg(apic, APIC_TMICT) > + * APIC_BUS_CYCLE_NS * apic->divide_count; > + > + if (!apic->lapic_timer.period) > + return; > + > + apic->lapic_timer.tscdeadline = kvm_read_l1_tsc(apic->vcpu, tscl) + > + nsec_to_cycles(apic->vcpu, apic->lapic_timer.period); > + now = apic->lapic_timer.timer.base->get_time(); > + apic->lapic_timer.expired_period = ktime_add_ns(now, apic->lapic_timer.period); > + > + start_hv_timer(apic); > + } > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_lapic_expired_hv_timer); > + > @@ -1470,10 +1497,25 @@ static void start_apic_timer(struct kvm_lapic *apic) > { > atomic_set(&apic->lapic_timer.pending, 0); > > - if (apic_lvtt_period(apic) || apic_lvtt_oneshot(apic)) > - start_sw_period(apic); > - else if (apic_lvtt_tscdeadline(apic)) { > - if (!(kvm_x86_ops->set_hv_timer && start_hv_tscdeadline(apic))) > + if (apic_lvtt_period(apic) || apic_lvtt_oneshot(apic)) { > + ktime_t now; > + u64 tscl = rdtsc(); > + > + apic->lapic_timer.period = (u64)kvm_lapic_get_reg(apic, APIC_TMICT) > + * APIC_BUS_CYCLE_NS * apic->divide_count; > + > + if (!apic->lapic_timer.period) > + return; > + apic->lapic_timer.tscdeadline = kvm_read_l1_tsc(apic->vcpu, tscl) + > + nsec_to_cycles(apic->vcpu, apic->lapic_timer.period); > + now = apic->lapic_timer.timer.base->get_time(); > + apic->lapic_timer.expired_period = ktime_add_ns(now, apic->lapic_timer.period); This is the same code as in kvm_lapic_expired_hv_timer(), a helper function is in order. > + > + if (!(kvm_x86_ops->set_hv_timer && start_hv_timer(apic))) > + start_sw_period(apic); > + } else if (apic_lvtt_tscdeadline(apic)) { > + if (!(kvm_x86_ops->set_hv_timer && start_hv_timer(apic))) > start_sw_tscdeadline(apic); > } > } > @@ -1711,8 +1753,7 @@ u64 kvm_get_lapic_tscdeadline_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > { > struct kvm_lapic *apic = vcpu->arch.apic; > > - if (!lapic_in_kernel(vcpu) || apic_lvtt_oneshot(apic) || > - apic_lvtt_period(apic)) rdmsr MSR_IA32_TSCDEADLINE has to return 0 when the timer is not in tsc deadline mode, so the condition should stay. (and check for apic_lvtt_tscdeadline(), but that is a unrelated cleanup.) > + if (!lapic_in_kernel(vcpu)) > return 0; > > return apic->lapic_timer.tscdeadline; Thanks.