[RFC PATCH 2/5] KVM: x86: avoid useless set of KVM_REQ_EVENT after emulation

From: Paolo Bonzini
Date: Thu Mar 27 2014 - 07:31:08 EST


Despite the provisions to emulate up to 130 consecutive instructions, in
practice KVM will emulate just one before exiting handle_invalid_guest_state,
because x86_emulate_instructionn always sets KVM_REQ_EVENT.

However, we only need to do this if an interrupt could be injected,
which happens a) if an interrupt shadow bit (STI or MOV SS) has gone
away; b) if the interrupt flag has just been set (because other
instructions than STI can set it without enabling an interrupt shadow).

This cuts another 250-300 clock cycles from the cost of emulating an
instruction (530-870 cycles before the patch on kvm-unit-tests,
290-600 afterwards).

Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index fd31aada351b..ce9523345f2e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ static u64 __read_mostly efer_reserved_bits = ~((u64)EFER_SCE);

static void update_cr8_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
static void process_nmi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+static void __kvm_set_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags);

struct kvm_x86_ops *kvm_x86_ops;
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_x86_ops);
@@ -4856,8 +4857,10 @@ static void toggle_interruptibility(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 mask)
* means that the last instruction is an sti. We should not
* leave the flag on in this case. The same goes for mov ss
*/
- if (!(int_shadow & mask))
+ if (unlikely(int_shadow) && !(int_shadow & mask)) {
kvm_x86_ops->set_interrupt_shadow(vcpu, mask);
+ kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu);
+ }
}

static void inject_emulated_exception(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
@@ -5083,20 +5086,18 @@ static int kvm_vcpu_check_hw_bp(unsigned long addr, u32 type, u32 dr7,
return dr6;
}

-static void kvm_vcpu_check_singlestep(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int *r)
+static void kvm_vcpu_check_singlestep(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags, int *r)
{
struct kvm_run *kvm_run = vcpu->run;

/*
- * Use the "raw" value to see if TF was passed to the processor.
- * Note that the new value of the flags has not been saved yet.
+ * rflags is the old, "raw" value of the flags. The new value has
+ * not been saved yet.
*
* This is correct even for TF set by the guest, because "the
* processor will not generate this exception after the instruction
* that sets the TF flag".
*/
- unsigned long rflags = kvm_x86_ops->get_rflags(vcpu);
-
if (unlikely(rflags & X86_EFLAGS_TF)) {
if (vcpu->guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP) {
kvm_run->debug.arch.dr6 = DR6_BS | DR6_FIXED_1;
@@ -5263,13 +5264,15 @@ restart:
r = EMULATE_DONE;

if (writeback) {
+ unsigned long rflags = kvm_x86_ops->get_rflags(vcpu);
toggle_interruptibility(vcpu, ctxt->interruptibility);
- kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu);
vcpu->arch.emulate_regs_need_sync_to_vcpu = false;
kvm_rip_write(vcpu, ctxt->eip);
if (r == EMULATE_DONE)
- kvm_vcpu_check_singlestep(vcpu, &r);
- kvm_set_rflags(vcpu, ctxt->eflags);
+ kvm_vcpu_check_singlestep(vcpu, rflags, &r);
+ __kvm_set_rflags(vcpu, ctxt->eflags);
+ if (unlikely((ctxt->eflags & ~rflags) & X86_EFLAGS_IF))
+ kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu);
} else
vcpu->arch.emulate_regs_need_sync_to_vcpu = true;

@@ -7385,12 +7388,17 @@ unsigned long kvm_get_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_get_rflags);

-void kvm_set_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags)
+static void __kvm_set_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags)
{
if (vcpu->guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP &&
kvm_is_linear_rip(vcpu, vcpu->arch.singlestep_rip))
rflags |= X86_EFLAGS_TF;
kvm_x86_ops->set_rflags(vcpu, rflags);
+}
+
+void kvm_set_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags)
+{
+ __kvm_set_rflags(vcpu, rflags);
kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_set_rflags);
--
1.8.3.1


--
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/