Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-30359-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 00:38:36 +0800
From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>,
	Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86/mmu: Retry fault before acquiring mmu_lock
 if mapping is changing
Message-ID: <ZalUDLVJSVN/rEf2@yilunxu-OptiPlex-7050>
References: <20240110012045.505046-1-seanjc@google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240110012045.505046-1-seanjc@google.com>

On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 05:20:45PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Retry page faults without acquiring mmu_lock if the resolved gfn is covered
> by an active invalidation.  Contending for mmu_lock is especially
> problematic on preemptible kernels as the mmu_notifier invalidation task
> will yield mmu_lock (see rwlock_needbreak()), delay the in-progress

Is it possible fault-in task avoids contending mmu_lock by using _trylock()?
Like:

	while (!read_trylock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock))
		cpu_relax();

	if (is_page_fault_stale(vcpu, fault))
		goto out_unlock;
  
	r = kvm_tdp_mmu_map(vcpu, fault);

out_unlock:
	read_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock)

> invalidation, and ultimately increase the latency of resolving the page
> fault.  And in the worst case scenario, yielding will be accompanied by a
> remote TLB flush, e.g. if the invalidation covers a large range of memory
> and vCPUs are accessing addresses that were already zapped.

This case covers all usage of mmu_invalidate_retry_gfn(), is it? Should
we also consider vmx_set_apic_access_page_addr()?

Thanks,
Yilun