Re: [PATCH v3 11/34] KVM: x86: hyper-v: Use preallocated buffer in 'struct kvm_vcpu_hv' instead of on-stack 'sparse_banks'
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Date: 2022-05-17 14:20:16
Also in:
kvm, lkml
Sean Christopherson [off-list ref] writes:
On Tue, May 17, 2022, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:quoted
Sean Christopherson [off-list ref] writes:quoted
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:quoted
To make kvm_hv_flush_tlb() ready to handle L2 TLB flush requests, KVM needs to allow for all 64 sparse vCPU banks regardless of KVM_MAX_VCPUs as L1 may use vCPU overcommit for L2. To avoid growing on-stack allocation, make 'sparse_banks' part of per-vCPU 'struct kvm_vcpu_hv' which is allocated dynamically. Note: sparse_set_to_vcpu_mask() keeps using on-stack allocation as it won't be used to handle L2 TLB flush requests.I think it's worth using stronger language; handling TLB flushes for L2 _can't_ use sparse_set_to_vcpu_mask() because KVM has no idea how to translate an L2 vCPU index to an L1 vCPU. I found the above mildly confusing because it didn't call out "vp_bitmap" and so I assumed the note referred to yet another sparse_banks "allocation". And while vp_bitmap is related to sparse_banks, it tracks something entirely different. Something like? Note: sparse_set_to_vcpu_mask() can never be used to handle L2 requests as KVM can't translate L2 vCPU indices to L1 vCPUs, i.e. its vp_bitmap array is still bounded by the number of L1 vCPUs and so can remain an on-stack allocation.My brain is probably tainted by looking at all this for some time so I really appreciate such improvements, thanks :) I wouldn't, however, say "never" ('never say never' :-)): KVM could've kept 2-level reverse mapping up-to-date: KVM -> L2 VM list -> L2 vCPU ids -> L1 vCPUs which run them making it possible for KVM to quickly translate between L2 VP IDs and L1 vCPUs. I don't do this in the series and just record L2 VM_ID/VP_ID for each L1 vCPU so I have to go over them all for each request. The optimization is, however, possible and we may get to it if really big Windows VMs become a reality.Out of curiosity, is L1 "required" to provides the L2 => L1 translation/map?
To make this "Direct Virtual Flush" feature work? Yes, it is: ... " Before enabling it, the L1 hypervisor must configure the following additional fields of the enlightened VMCS: - VpId: ID of the virtual processor that the enlightened VMCS controls. - VmId: ID of the virtual machine that the enlightened VMCS belongs to. - PartitionAssistPage: Guest physical address of the partition assist page. " -- Vitaly