Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Lazily allocate memslot rmaps
To:     Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Peter Shier <pshier@google.com>,
        Junaid Shahid <junaids@google.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Yulei Zhang <yulei.kernel@gmail.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@gmail.com>
References: <20210429211833.3361994-1-bgardon@google.com>
 <a3279647-fb30-4033-2a9d-75d473bd8f8e@redhat.com>
 <CANgfPd-fD33hJkQP_MVb2a4CadKQbkpwwtP9r5rMrC_Mripeqg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <4d27e9d6-42db-3aa1-053a-552e1643f46d@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 May 2021 09:21:48 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANgfPd-fD33hJkQP_MVb2a4CadKQbkpwwtP9r5rMrC_Mripeqg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 03/05/21 19:31, Ben Gardon wrote:
> On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 6:45 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 29/04/21 23:18, Ben Gardon wrote:
>>> This series enables KVM to save memory when using the TDP MMU by waiting
>>> to allocate memslot rmaps until they are needed. To do this, KVM tracks
>>> whether or not a shadow root has been allocated. In order to get away
>>> with not allocating the rmaps, KVM must also be sure to skip operations
>>> which iterate over the rmaps. If the TDP MMU is in use and we have not
>>> allocated a shadow root, these operations would essentially be op-ops
>>> anyway. Skipping the rmap operations has a secondary benefit of avoiding
>>> acquiring the MMU lock in write mode in many cases, substantially
>>> reducing MMU lock contention.
>>>
>>> This series was tested on an Intel Skylake machine. With the TDP MMU off
>>> and on, this introduced no new failures on kvm-unit-tests or KVM selftests.
>>
>> Thanks, I only reported some technicalities in the ordering of loads
>> (which matter since the loads happen with SRCU protection only).  Apart
>> from this, this looks fine!
> 
> Awesome to hear, thank you for the reviews. Should I send a v3
> addressing those comments, or did you already make those changes when
> applying to your tree?

No, I didn't (I wanted some oversight, and this is 5.14 stuff anyway).

Paolo