Re: [PATCH v2] vfio iommu type1: Improve vfio_iommu_type1_pin_pages performance

[Eric Farman]

On 12/9/20 6:54 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 21:55:53 +0800
> "xuxiaoyang (C)" <xuxiaoyang2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On 2020/11/21 15:58, xuxiaoyang (C) wrote:
> > > vfio_pin_pages() accepts an array of unrelated iova pfns and processes
> > > each to return the physical pfn.  When dealing with large arrays of
> > > contiguous iovas, vfio_iommu_type1_pin_pages is very inefficient because
> > > it is processed page by page.In this case, we can divide the iova pfn
> > > array into multiple continuous ranges and optimize them.  For example,
> > > when the iova pfn array is {1,5,6,7,9}, it will be divided into three
> > > groups {1}, {5,6,7}, {9} for processing.  When processing {5,6,7}, the
> > > number of calls to pin_user_pages_remote is reduced from 3 times to once.
> > > For single page or large array of discontinuous iovas, we still use
> > > vfio_pin_page_external to deal with it to reduce the performance loss
> > > caused by refactoring.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Xiaoyang Xu <xuxiaoyang2@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> (...)
>
> > hi Cornelia Huck, Eric Farman, Zhenyu Wang, Zhi Wang
> >
> > vfio_pin_pages() accepts an array of unrelated iova pfns and processes
> > each to return the physical pfn.  When dealing with large arrays of
> > contiguous iovas, vfio_iommu_type1_pin_pages is very inefficient because
> > it is processed page by page.  In this case, we can divide the iova pfn
> > array into multiple continuous ranges and optimize them.  I have a set
> > of performance test data for reference.
> >
> > The patch was not applied
> >                      1 page           512 pages
> > no huge pages：     1638ns           223651ns
> > THP：               1668ns           222330ns
> > HugeTLB：           1526ns           208151ns
> >
> > The patch was applied
> >                      1 page           512 pages
> > no huge pages       1735ns           167286ns
> > THP：               1934ns           126900ns
> > HugeTLB：           1713ns           102188ns
> >
> > As Alex Williamson said, this patch lacks proof that it works in the
> > real world. I think you will have some valuable opinions.
>
> Looking at this from the vfio-ccw angle, I'm not sure how much this
> would buy us, as we deal with IDAWs, which are designed so that they
> can be non-contiguous. I guess this depends a lot on what the guest
> does.

This would be my concern too, but I don't have data off the top of my 
head to say one way or another...

> Eric, any opinion? Do you maybe also happen to have a test setup that
> mimics workloads actually seen in the real world?

...I do have some test setups, which I will try to get some data from in 
a couple days. At the moment I've broken most of those setups trying to 
implement some other stuff, and can't revert back at the moment. Will 
get back to this.

Eric