Re: [RFC PATCH 00/12] KVM: MMU: locklessly wirte-protect

From: Xiao Guangrong
Date: Tue Aug 06 2013 - 10:03:43 EST


Hi Gleb, Paolo, Marcelo, Takuya,

Any comments or further comments? :)

On 07/30/2013 09:01 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Background
> ==========
> Currently, when mark memslot dirty logged or get dirty page, we need to
> write-protect large guest memory, it is the heavy work, especially, we need to
> hold mmu-lock which is also required by vcpu to fix its page table fault and
> mmu-notifier when host page is being changed. In the extreme cpu / memory used
> guest, it becomes a scalability issue.
>
> This patchset introduces a way to locklessly write-protect guest memory.
>
> Idea
> ==========
> There are the challenges we meet and the ideas to resolve them.
>
> 1) How to locklessly walk rmap?
> The first idea we got to prevent "desc" being freed when we are walking the
> rmap is using RCU. But when vcpu runs on shadow page mode or nested mmu mode,
> it updates the rmap really frequently.
>
> So we uses SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU to manage "desc" instead, it allows the object
> to be reused more quickly. We also store a "nulls" in the last "desc"
> (desc->more) which can help us to detect whether the "desc" is moved to anther
> rmap then we can re-walk the rmap if that happened. I learned this idea from
> nulls-list.
>
> Another issue is, when a spte is deleted from the "desc", another spte in the
> last "desc" will be moved to this position to replace the deleted one. If the
> deleted one has been accessed and we do not access the replaced one, the
> replaced one is missed when we do lockless walk.
> To fix this case, we do not backward move the spte, instead, we forward move
> the entry: when a spte is deleted, we move the entry in the first desc to that
> position.
>
> 2) How to locklessly access shadow page table?
> It is easy if the handler is in the vcpu context, in that case we can use
> walk_shadow_page_lockless_begin() and walk_shadow_page_lockless_end() that
> disable interrupt to stop shadow page be freed. But we are on the ioctl context
> and the paths we are optimizing for have heavy workload, disabling interrupt is
> not good for the system performance.
>
> We add a indicator into kvm struct (kvm->arch.rcu_free_shadow_page), then use
> call_rcu() to free the shadow page if that indicator is set. Set/Clear the
> indicator are protected by slot-lock, so it need not be atomic and does not
> hurt the performance and the scalability.
>
> 3) How to locklessly write-protect guest memory?
> Currently, there are two behaviors when we write-protect guest memory, one is
> clearing the Writable bit on spte and the another one is dropping spte when it
> points to large page. The former is easy we only need to atomicly clear a bit
> but the latter is hard since we need to remove the spte from rmap. so we unify
> these two behaviors that only make the spte readonly. Making large spte
> readonly instead of nonpresent is also good for reducing jitter.
>
> And we need to pay more attention on the order of making spte writable, adding
> spte into rmap and setting the corresponding bit on dirty bitmap since
> kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log() write-protects the spte based on the dirty bitmap,
> we should ensure the writable spte can be found in rmap before the dirty bitmap
> is visible. Otherwise, we cleared the dirty bitmap and failed to write-protect
> the page.
>
> Performance result
> ====================
> Host: CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5690 @ 3.47GHz x 12
> Mem: 36G
>
> The benchmark i used and will be attached:
> a) kernbench
> b) migrate-perf
> it emulates guest migration
> c) mmtest
> it repeatedly writes the memory and measures the time and is used to
> generate memory access in the guest which is being migrated
> d) Qemu monitor command to implement guest live migration
> the script can be found in migrate-perf.
>
>
> 1) First, we use kernbench to benchmark the performance with non-write-protection
> case to detect the possible regression:
>
> EPT enabled: Base: 84.05 After the patch: 83.53
> EPT disabled: Base: 142.57 After the patch: 141.70
>
> No regression and the optimization may come from lazily drop large spte.
>
> 2) Benchmark the performance of get dirty page
> (./migrate-perf -c 12 -m 3000 -t 20)
>
> Base: Run 20 times, Avg time:24813809 ns.
> After the patch: Run 20 times, Avg time:8371577 ns.
>
> It improves +196%
>
> 3) There is the result of Live Migration:
> 3.1) Less vcpus, less memory and less dirty page generated
> (
> Guest config: MEM_SIZE=7G VCPU_NUM=6
> The workload in migrated guest:
> ssh -f $CLIENT "cd ~; rm -f result; nohup /home/eric/mmtest/mmtest -m 3000 -c 30 -t 60 > result &"
> )
>
> Live Migration time (ms) Benchmark (ns)
> ----------------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> EPT | Baseline | 21638 | 266601028 |
> + -------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> | After | 21110 +2.5% | 264966696 +0.6% |
> ----------------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> Shadow | Baseline | 22542 | 271969284 | |
> +----------+---------------------+-------------+---------+
> | After | 21641 +4.1% | 270485511 +0.5% |
> -------+----------+---------------------------------------------+
>
> 3.2) More vcpus, more memory and less dirty page generated
> (
> Guest config: MEM_SIZE=25G VCPU_NUM=12
> The workload in migrated guest:
> ssh -f $CLIENT "cd ~; rm -f result; nohup /home/eric/mmtest/mmtest -m 15000 -c 30 -t 30 > result &"
> )
>
> Live Migration time (ms) Benchmark (ns)
> ----------------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> EPT | Baseline | 72773 | 1278228350 |
> + -------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> | After | 70516 +3.2% | 1266581587 +0.9% |
> ----------------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> Shadow | Baseline | 74198 | 1323180090 | |
> +----------+---------------------+-------------+---------+
> | After | 64948 +14.2% | 1299283302 +1.8% |
> -------+----------+---------------------------------------------+
>
> 3.3) Less vcpus, more memory and huge dirty page generated
> (
> Guest config: MEM_SIZE=25G VCPU_NUM=6
> The workload in migrated guest:
> ssh -f $CLIENT "cd ~; rm -f result; nohup /home/eric/mmtest/mmtest -m 15000 -c 30 -t 200 > result &"
> )
>
> Live Migration time (ms) Benchmark (ns)
> ----------------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> EPT | Baseline | 267473 | 1224657502 |
> + -------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> | After | 267374 +0.03% | 1221520513 +0.6% |
> ----------------------------------------+-------------+---------+
> Shadow | Baseline | 369999 | 1712004428 | |
> +----------+---------------------+-------------+---------+
> | After | 335737 +10.2% | 1556065063 +10.2% |
> -------+----------+---------------------------------------------+
>
> For the case of 3.3), EPT gets small benefit, the reason is only the first
> time guest writes memory need take mmu-lock to mark spte from nonpresent to
> present. Other writes cost lots of time to trigger the page fault due to
> write-protection which are fixed by fast page fault which need not take
> mmu-lock.
>
> Xiao Guangrong (12):
> KVM: MMU: remove unused parameter
> KVM: MMU: properly check last spte in fast_page_fault()
> KVM: MMU: lazily drop large spte
> KVM: MMU: log dirty page after marking spte writable
> KVM: MMU: add spte into rmap before logging dirty page
> KVM: MMU: flush tlb if the spte can be locklessly modified
> KVM: MMU: redesign the algorithm of pte_list
> KVM: MMU: introduce nulls desc
> KVM: MMU: introduce pte-list lockless walker
> KVM: MMU: allow locklessly access shadow page table out of vcpu thread
> KVM: MMU: locklessly write-protect the page
> KVM: MMU: clean up spte_write_protect
>
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 10 +-
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 442 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.h | 28 +++
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 19 +-
> 4 files changed, 356 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-)
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/