lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86 fixes for 3.3 impacting distros (v1).
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 07:42:12AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/28/2012 07:28 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >
> > Peter mentioned to me had some ideas about software PAT table lookup. I am not
> > exactly sure what he meant by that.
> >
>
> I could see the kernel have programmable PAT values rather than fixed if
> and only if it can be showed to have no measurable performance impact.
>
> > Just to summarize, there were two ways proposed to fix this:
> >
> > 1). Make __page_change_attr_set_clr use a new wrapper: pte_attr, that calls
> > pte_val (pvops call) instead of pte_flag (native). Here is the patch:
> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git;a=commitdiff;h=4f93aa02acd0e34806d4ac9c3a700bb5d040eab6
> > (no perf regressions across all platforms)
> >
> > 2). Introduce a new pvops call - pte_flags, which would make pte_flags
> > (which currently is doing just a bit mask) be pvops-fied.
> > http://darnok.org/results/baseline_pte_flags_pte_attrs/0001-x86-paravirt-xen-Introduce-pte_flags.patch
> > http://darnok.org/results/baseline_pte_flags_pte_attrs/0002-x86-paravirt-xen-Optimize-pte_flags-by-marking-it-as.patch
> > (weird results on AMD, other platforms had no perf degradations)
> >
> > 3). (not posted), was to do 2), but alter the alternative_asm and instead use asm_goto to
> > make the compiler use less registers and hopefully reduce the code:
> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/devel/mmu-perf
> > But the results I got showed worst performance on baremetal.. which was weird?
> > Perhaps it is compiler related - never got to follow up on it.
> >
>
> OK, let me be blunt: I will unconditionally veto any of these.

Peter,

hmm, It looks like option 1 doesn't have any perf regression, but it is still
not acceptable? That is fine. If you prefer to have a software PAT table lookup, could you provide
some details so I can try to get something align that direction?

CJ

>
> >
> > I also chatted with the core Xen hypervisor folks about adding in the context switch code
> > to alter the PAT layout - but they were not keen a about it - and I am not sure how much
> > CPU cycles one loses by doing a wrmsr to the PAT register on every guest context switch
> > (worst case when on has a pvops kernel and a old-style one - where the WC bit would differ)?
> >
>
> And you're comparing that to a bunch of new pvops calls? The discussion
> shouldn't even have started until you had ruled out this solution and
> had data to show it.
>
> -hpa


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-30 00:41    [W:0.057 / U:0.504 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site