Received: by 2002:a05:6358:16cc:b0:ea:6187:17c9 with SMTP id r12csp3613054rwl; Tue, 27 Dec 2022 11:59:43 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXt1c/xlgDFlsEI/6zGWP6/96SzfNAatDxQJwZ6UvjmX/vcfXGi00DM9GM/IFpx5bjCW8KgJ X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:b00c:b0:7c4:fa17:7202 with SMTP id v12-20020a170906b00c00b007c4fa177202mr18581843ejy.33.1672171183386; Tue, 27 Dec 2022 11:59:43 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1672171183; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=K3wk74qvbU/edVeoWZurCZiF2a7LLrfcgWarVkCsyw5WfDxcsxhmGDL2SmDU979D5s m90aPYxtMeZVTA7lWabi4jTOtADVmjODuR/c3xikGndFoBZphzndAOlCWZUmA6KsjFI2 VWie5kE8zLeKQLRDIOv8e4R9Q/XaJvH3az8ztGyFHD1CMv9Gr9gDaf+nu9zQihIhdNIB rOQcDNuVNKzb6TZUfUPKJnoLCYAKOeQuTaeKZ25UbHzUgfmITInX0lg5vJ1boFwQc7S1 J7JnP2eF4aqaraU3BfunRpW5iNkO0+Y6PnZSte3rSC13WXn6XFZK1Rq/2YSZTFJNJCDp h1gw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=MqHaR9sjfvD/myYgTCGg8KetMxcHxaTjMlGqG5MAO9k=; b=G9SRp59eSf3TMzEzUAAOYhVfCjQ/BWGBVjWR3Uq0eP9O698AwvUjpfJAK+HbewRZ7n GqGYofCqJnwbGqCMtodw/OhQNU4xypUeIfIZCVm88NzBN1gV3FNZ7JDYHOeW4qkqg3gN KyaufL/vDf/++RKqIjQIkeeiuhpO8kep0QBCdEGAmnsAPmlWoAJMSDtEmAdnwIPWiV2f YVF8sCTaEpfUU+6ERUBoPHAowTgHyYJsO95GN+c8FZss/U55cNQAQtIAiqcsiyHQOeqv pzk0fi9yV2ZP+ezBYxv8V4chuHqwk3iq4XhqtCXdFjwMiqHUIL33dbcAxcOgP8wp+jzA gUmQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=XgnfCcvz; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id hr42-20020a1709073faa00b00781c1645926si12686821ejc.524.2022.12.27.11.59.27; Tue, 27 Dec 2022 11:59:43 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=XgnfCcvz; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231489AbiL0Twl (ORCPT + 66 others); Tue, 27 Dec 2022 14:52:41 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54976 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229788AbiL0Twk (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Dec 2022 14:52:40 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x62b.google.com (mail-ej1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 897BA101E for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2022 11:52:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id u19so33985490ejm.8 for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2022 11:52:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=MqHaR9sjfvD/myYgTCGg8KetMxcHxaTjMlGqG5MAO9k=; b=XgnfCcvzBuSiJzDiv7aDolyIPTPWFRvNbzy4Ek6y5tWZ3l29g6hywBSS4horRwif36 OYAzH01aL7EYhASMi2GptFgKiMIGLNbPVArxcmQW51DS3JhaYKQe7jjU5SDaoiVSb9Yf tkmrscmvnv5CDQdxEypaNxOZapoqzdnkoQXr0V7lueUUsBgDG5vKwWcYOCmffZ9c+z22 9Es2pr2McwlTd35rHhn8pFynHTqIyVFMRt7XhTHQ4emwKRs1u7WHQy4nSoPOP3k9/3TJ yaoHYhk3kG0Rw8+if3RReiYQP097rH+Za2Jx9WRmB5dPaTsnFhEY2kwKpzZ1VGTZO6vE ZFLQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=MqHaR9sjfvD/myYgTCGg8KetMxcHxaTjMlGqG5MAO9k=; b=kpS2n/klez1zd0onXFSk7TOogXjbqIwgmDqVdKuLVLVm7NKOw2DYZx29mA90dJgQwj VpMYRyEN/wwZWl6N/I769TRFuAAu4UBwkFFY0st7mi7geRhbFOWnnRnsjleK/aKwsBYu H53H5COgPz13OyOOAxlGbGYlF66I8yDxLcwh8oNvo8UOtzxb+/r5VUEuVdDB4SOedZe6 ko7yiuNEpZH5Hh4qmbgSO82HJWMWC0TiWNo4u/VN99ryAQIHYKZCaaov/M4rEdw0v0yy CmMKS4VZeAwWlxsWRd50So4PsXJi1nzsk6IESHaIN1KFIYFHiCADwtMQGcyDMbK2pz7z pGmw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kqwPSKVmQ0seMC/n6jsFINuhFIgyznxEuIBAckMuKWFo3CuYJ8y c1iZcLxNcC8O5tma8IrOm/rrWPEhFZJFb78F1Scepulz8EVJCA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1cc2:b0:7ad:9ad7:e882 with SMTP id i2-20020a1709061cc200b007ad9ad7e882mr2168940ejh.520.1672170757022; Tue, 27 Dec 2022 11:52:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221222023457.1764-1-vipinsh@google.com> <20221222023457.1764-10-vipinsh@google.com> In-Reply-To: <20221222023457.1764-10-vipinsh@google.com> From: Ben Gardon Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2022 11:52:25 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Patch v3 9/9] KVM: x86/mmu: Reduce default cache size in KVM from 40 to PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL To: Vipin Sharma Cc: seanjc@google.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, dmatlack@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL,USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 6:35 PM Vipin Sharma wrote: > > KVM_ARCH_NR_OBJS_PER_MEMORY_CACHE is set to 40 without any specific > reason. Reduce default size to PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL, which is currently > 5. > > Change mmu_pte_list_desc_cache size to what is needed as it is more than > 5 but way less than 40. Why do you say more than 5? At least to resolve a page fault we'll never need more than 4 pages on a system with 5 level paging since the root is already allocated. > > Tested by running dirty_log_perf_test on both tdp and shadow MMU with 48 > vcpu and 2GB/vcpu size on a 2 NUMA node machine. No impact on > performance noticed. > > Ran perf on dirty_log_perf_test and found kvm_mmu_get_free_page() calls > reduced by ~3300 which is near to 48 (vcpus) * 2 (nodes) * 35 (cache > size). > > Signed-off-by: Vipin Sharma > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_types.h | 2 +- > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 7 ++++--- > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_types.h > index 08f1b57d3b62..752dab218a62 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_types.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_types.h > @@ -2,6 +2,6 @@ > #ifndef _ASM_X86_KVM_TYPES_H > #define _ASM_X86_KVM_TYPES_H > > -#define KVM_ARCH_NR_OBJS_PER_MEMORY_CACHE 40 > +#define KVM_ARCH_NR_OBJS_PER_MEMORY_CACHE PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL Please add a comment explaining why this value was chosen. > > #endif /* _ASM_X86_KVM_TYPES_H */ > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > index 7454bfc49a51..f89d933ff380 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > @@ -677,11 +677,12 @@ static int mmu_topup_sp_memory_cache(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *cache, > > static int mmu_topup_memory_caches(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool maybe_indirect) > { > - int r, nid; > + int r, nid, desc_capacity; > > /* 1 rmap, 1 parent PTE per level, and the prefetched rmaps. */ > - r = kvm_mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->arch.mmu_pte_list_desc_cache, > - 1 + PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL + PTE_PREFETCH_NUM); > + desc_capacity = 1 + PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL + PTE_PREFETCH_NUM; > + r = __kvm_mmu_topup_memory_cache(&vcpu->arch.mmu_pte_list_desc_cache, > + desc_capacity, desc_capacity); > if (r) > return r; > > -- > 2.39.0.314.g84b9a713c41-goog >