Re: [Patch v3 8/9] KVM: x86/mmu: Make split_shadow_page_cache NUMA aware

[Vipin Sharma]

On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 3:18 PM David Matlack <dmatlack@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 06:34:56PM -0800, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> > Make split_shadow_page_cache NUMA aware and allocate page table's pages
> > during the split based on the underlying physical page's NUMA node.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h |  2 +-
> >  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c          | 50 ++++++++++++++++++---------------
> >  2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > index b1f319ad6f89..7b3f36ae37a4 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > @@ -1410,7 +1410,7 @@ struct kvm_arch {
> >        *
> >        * Protected by kvm->slots_lock.
> >        */
> > -     struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache split_shadow_page_cache;
> > +     struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache split_shadow_page_cache[MAX_NUMNODES];
> >       struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache split_page_header_cache;
> >
> >       /*
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > index 511c6ef265ee..7454bfc49a51 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > @@ -6126,7 +6126,7 @@ static void kvm_mmu_invalidate_zap_pages_in_memslot(struct kvm *kvm,
> >  int kvm_mmu_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm)
> >  {
> >       struct kvm_page_track_notifier_node *node = &kvm->arch.mmu_sp_tracker;
> > -     int r;
> > +     int r, nid;
> >
> >       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.active_mmu_pages);
> >       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.possible_nx_huge_pages);
> > @@ -6145,8 +6145,9 @@ int kvm_mmu_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm)
> >       INIT_KVM_MMU_MEMORY_CACHE(&kvm->arch.split_page_header_cache,
> >                                 mmu_page_header_cache, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> >
> > -     INIT_KVM_MMU_MEMORY_CACHE(&kvm->arch.split_shadow_page_cache,
> > -                               NULL, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> > +     for_each_node(nid)
> > +             INIT_KVM_MMU_MEMORY_CACHE(&kvm->arch.split_shadow_page_cache[nid],
> > +                                       NULL, NUMA_NO_NODE);
>                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>                                                 Should this be nid?
Yes, I will fix it in the next version. Thanks