Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] kvm: Add guest side support for free memory hints
From:   Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c24dc2351f3dc2f0e0bdf552c6504851e6fa6c06.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Feb 2019 16:03:45 -0800
Cc:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@redhat.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, bp@alien8.de, hpa@zytor.com,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4DFBB378-8E7A-4905-A94D-D56B5FF6D42B@gmail.com>
References: <20190204181118.12095.38300.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
 <20190204181552.12095.46287.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
 <4E64E8CA-6741-47DF-87DE-88D01B01B15D@gmail.com>
 <c24dc2351f3dc2f0e0bdf552c6504851e6fa6c06.camel@linux.intel.com>
To:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> On Feb 4, 2019, at 3:37 PM, Alexander Duyck =
<alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>=20
> On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 15:00 -0800, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>> On Feb 4, 2019, at 10:15 AM, Alexander Duyck =
<alexander.duyck@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
>>>=20
>>> Add guest support for providing free memory hints to the KVM =
hypervisor for
>>> freed pages huge TLB size or larger. I am restricting the size to
>>> huge TLB order and larger because the hypercalls are too expensive =
to be
>>> performing one per 4K page. Using the huge TLB order became the =
obvious
>>> choice for the order to use as it allows us to avoid fragmentation =
of higher
>>> order memory on the host.
>>>=20
>>> I have limited the functionality so that it doesn't work when page
>>> poisoning is enabled. I did this because a write to the page after =
doing an
>>> MADV_DONTNEED would effectively negate the hint, so it would be =
wasting
>>> cycles to do so.
>>>=20
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/x86/include/asm/page.h |   13 +++++++++++++
>>> arch/x86/kernel/kvm.c       |   23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+)
>>>=20
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/page.h =
b/arch/x86/include/asm/page.h
>>> index 7555b48803a8..4487ad7a3385 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/page.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/page.h
>>> @@ -18,6 +18,19 @@
>>>=20
>>> struct page;
>>>=20
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_GUEST
>>> +#include <linux/jump_label.h>
>>> +extern struct static_key_false pv_free_page_hint_enabled;
>>> +
>>> +#define HAVE_ARCH_FREE_PAGE
>>> +void __arch_free_page(struct page *page, unsigned int order);
>>> +static inline void arch_free_page(struct page *page, unsigned int =
order)
>>> +{
>>> +	if (static_branch_unlikely(&pv_free_page_hint_enabled))
>>> +		__arch_free_page(page, order);
>>> +}
>>> +#endif
>>=20
>> This patch and the following one assume that only KVM should be able =
to hook
>> to these events. I do not think it is appropriate for =
__arch_free_page() to
>> effectively mean =E2=80=9Ckvm_guest_free_page()=E2=80=9D.
>>=20
>> Is it possible to use the paravirt infrastructure for this feature,
>> similarly to other PV features? It is not the best infrastructure, =
but at least
>> it is hypervisor-neutral.
>=20
> I could probably tie this into the paravirt infrastructure, but if I
> did so I would probably want to pull the checks for the page order out
> of the KVM specific bits and make it something we handle in the =
inline.
> Doing that I would probably make it a paravirtual hint that only
> operates at the PMD level. That way we wouldn't incur the cost of the
> paravirt infrastructure at the per 4K page level.

If I understand you correctly, you =E2=80=9Ccomplain=E2=80=9D that this =
would affect
performance.

While it might be, you may want to check whether the already available
tools can solve the problem:

1. You can use a combination of static-key and pv-ops - see for example
steal_account_process_time()

2. You can use callee-saved pv-ops.

The latter might anyhow be necessary since, IIUC, you change a very hot
path. So you may want have a look on the assembly code of =
free_pcp_prepare()
(or at least its code-size) before and after your changes. If they are =
too
big, a callee-saved function might be necessary.