Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: PPC: Enable CAP_SPAPR_TCE_VFIO on pSeries KVM guests

[Amit Machhiwal]

Hi Ritesh,

Thanks for reviewing the patch. My response is inline:

On 2025/02/17 09:30 AM, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
> Amit Machhiwal <amachhiw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > Currently on book3s-hv, the capability KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_VFIO is only
> > available for KVM Guests running on PowerNV and not for the KVM guests
> > running on pSeries hypervisors. This prevents a pSeries L2 guest from
> > leveraging the in-kernel acceleration for H_PUT_TCE_INDIRECT and
> > H_STUFF_TCE hcalls that results in slow startup times for large memory
> > guests.
> >
> > Fix this by enabling the CAP_SPAPR_TCE_VFIO on the pSeries hosts as well
> > for the nested PAPR guests. With the patch, booting an L2 guest with
> > 128G memory results in an average improvement of 11% in the startup
> > times.
> >
> > Fixes: f431a8cde7f1 ("powerpc/iommu: Reimplement the iommu_table_group_ops for pSeries")
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Amit Machhiwal <amachhiw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changes since v1:
> >     * Addressed review comments from Ritesh
> >     * v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250109132053.158436-1-amachhiw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> 
> Thanks Amit for v2. However we still didn't answer one important
> question regarding the context / background of this patch asked here [2]
> 
> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/87r059vpmi.fsf@xxxxxxxxx/
> 
> <copy paste from v1>
>     IIUC it was said here [1] that this capability is not available on
>     pSeries, hence it got removed. Could you please give a background on
>     why this can be enabled now for pSeries? Was there any additional
>     support added for this? 
>     [1]:
>     https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20181214052910.23639-2-sjitindarsingh@xxxxxxxxx/
> 
>     ... Ohh thinking back a little, are you saying that after the patch...
>     f431a8cde7f1 ("powerpc/iommu: Reimplement the iommu_table_group_ops for pSeries")
>     ...we can bring back this capability for kvm guest running on pseries
>     as well. Because all underlying issues in using VFIO on pseries were
>     fixed. Is this understanding correct? 
> 

Yes, your understanding is correct.

> 
> Please also update the commit message with the required context of why we can
> enable this capability now while it was explicitely marked as disabled
> earlier in [1].
> 

Sure, I'll update the patch description and send a v3 soon.

> But looks good otherwise. With that addressed in the commit message,
> please feel free to add - 
> 
> Reviewed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx>
> 

Thanks!

~ Amit

> -ritesh
> 
> >
> >  arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c | 5 +----
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> > index ce1d91eed231..a7138eb18d59 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> > @@ -543,26 +543,23 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
> >  		r = !hv_enabled;
> >  		break;
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_KVM_MPIC
> >  	case KVM_CAP_IRQ_MPIC:
> >  		r = 1;
> >  		break;
> >  #endif
> >
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64
> >  	case KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE:
> > +		fallthrough;
> >  	case KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_64:
> > -		r = 1;
> > -		break;
> >  	case KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_VFIO:
> > -		r = !!cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_HVMODE);
> > -		break;
> >  	case KVM_CAP_PPC_RTAS:
> >  	case KVM_CAP_PPC_FIXUP_HCALL:
> >  	case KVM_CAP_PPC_ENABLE_HCALL:
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_KVM_XICS
> >  	case KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS:
> >  #endif
> >  	case KVM_CAP_PPC_GET_CPU_CHAR:
> >  		r = 1;
> >  		break;
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_KVM_XIVE
> >
> > base-commit: 6d61a53dd6f55405ebcaea6ee38d1ab5a8856c2c
> > -- 
> > 2.48.1