[v2,0/3] x86: improve assisted tlb flush and use it in guest mode

Message

Roger Pau Monné Jan. 10, 2020, 4:04 p.m. UTC

Hello,

The following series aims to improve the TLB flush times when running
nested Xen, and it's specially beneficial when running in shim mode.

Patch #2 is likely the most controversial one, as it changes the
implementation of assisted TLB flushes. I have to admit I haven't been
able to figure out why HVM guest context flushes issued a
flush_tlb_mask, and the commit introducing such behavior doesn't contain
a helpful commit message.

See patch #3 for a comparison on the performance of the L0 assisted
flush vs using x2APIC shorthand.

Thanks, Roger.

Roger Pau Monne (3):
  x86/hvm: allow ASID flush when v != current
  x86/hvm: rework HVMOP_flush_tlbs
  x86/tlb: use Xen L0 assisted TLB flush when available

 xen/arch/x86/guest/hypervisor.c        |  9 +++++
 xen/arch/x86/guest/xen/xen.c           |  6 +++
 xen/arch/x86/hvm/asid.c                |  6 +--
 xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c                 | 54 +++++++++++---------------
 xen/arch/x86/hvm/viridian/viridian.c   |  7 +---
 xen/arch/x86/smp.c                     |  6 +++
 xen/include/asm-x86/guest/hypervisor.h | 13 +++++++
 xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/hvm.h          |  2 +-
 8 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)

Comments

Jan Beulich Jan. 10, 2020, 4:08 p.m. UTC | #1

On 10.01.2020 17:04, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> Patch #2 is likely the most controversial one, as it changes the
> implementation of assisted TLB flushes. I have to admit I haven't been
> able to figure out why HVM guest context flushes issued a
> flush_tlb_mask, and the commit introducing such behavior doesn't contain
> a helpful commit message.

A shadow mode thing, maybe?

Jan

Roger Pau Monné Jan. 10, 2020, 4:14 p.m. UTC | #2

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 05:08:16PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 10.01.2020 17:04, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > Patch #2 is likely the most controversial one, as it changes the
> > implementation of assisted TLB flushes. I have to admit I haven't been
> > able to figure out why HVM guest context flushes issued a
> > flush_tlb_mask, and the commit introducing such behavior doesn't contain
> > a helpful commit message.
> 
> A shadow mode thing, maybe?

Hm, I could be wrong, but that flush doesn't seem to make sense for
shadow mode either.

If VPID/ASID is used, ticking it will drop all the guest caches, and
if VPID/ASID not used a vmexit/vmentry will clear the cache.
According to my reading of the Intel SDM this applies regardless of
whether HAP (EPT) is used or not.

The flush done by flush_tlb_mask is in root mode, and hence doesn't
affect the guest (non-root) caches when SVM/VTx is used.

Roger.