David S. Ahern wrote:
> I've continued drilling down with the tracers to answer that question. I have
> done runs with tracers in paging64_page_fault and it showed the overhead is
> with
> the fetch() function. On my last run the tracers are in paging64_fetch() as
> follows:
>
> 1. after is_present_pte() check
> 2. before kvm_mmu_get_page()
> 3. after kvm_mmu_get_page()
> 4. after if (!metaphysical) {}
>
> The delta between 2 and 3 shows the cycles to run kvm_mmu_get_page(). The
> delta
> between 3 and 4 shows the cycles to run kvm_read_guest_atomic(), if it is run.
> Tracer1 dumps vcpu->arch.last_pt_write_count (a carryover from when the new
> tracers were in paging64_page_fault); tracer2 dumps the level, metaphysical
> and
> access variables; tracer5 dumps value in shadow_ent.
>
> A representative trace sample is:
>
> (+ 4576) VMEXIT [ exitcode = 0x00000000, rip = 0x00000000 c016104a
> ]
> (+ 0) PAGE_FAULT [ errorcode = 0x0000000b, virt = 0x00000000
> fffb6950 ]
> (+ 2664) PAGE_FAULT1 [ write_count = 0 ]
> (+ 472) PAGE_FAULT2 [ level = 2 metaphysical = 0 access 0x00000007 ]
> (+ 50416) PAGE_FAULT3
> (+ 472) PAGE_FAULT4
> (+ 856) PAGE_FAULT5 [ shadow_ent_val = 0x80000000 9276d043 ]
> (+ 1528) VMENTRY
> (+ 4992) VMEXIT [ exitcode = 0x00000000, rip = 0x00000000 c01610e7
> ]
> (+ 0) PAGE_FAULT [ errorcode = 0x00000003, virt = 0x00000000
> c0009db4 ]
> (+ 2296) PAGE_FAULT1 [ write_count = 0 ]
> (+ 816) PAGE_FAULT5 [ shadow_ent_val = 0x00000000 8a809041 ]
> (+ 0) PTE_WRITE [ gpa = 0x00000000 00009db4 gpte = 0x00000000
> 4176d363 ]
> (+ 6424) VMENTRY
> (+ 3864) VMEXIT [ exitcode = 0x00000000, rip = 0x00000000 c01610ee
> ]
> (+ 0) PAGE_FAULT [ errorcode = 0x00000003, virt = 0x00000000
> c0009db0 ]
> (+ 2496) PAGE_FAULT1 [ write_count = 1 ]
> (+ 856) PAGE_FAULT5 [ shadow_ent_val = 0x00000000 8a809041 ]
> (+ 0) PTE_WRITE [ gpa = 0x00000000 00009db0 gpte = 0x00000000
> 00000000 ]
> (+ 10248) VMENTRY
> (+ 4744) VMEXIT [ exitcode = 0x00000000, rip = 0x00000000 c016127c
> ]
> (+ 0) PAGE_FAULT [ errorcode = 0x00000003, virt = 0x00000000
> c0009db4 ]
> (+ 2408) PAGE_FAULT1 [ write_count = 2 ]
> (+ 760) PAGE_FAULT5 [ shadow_ent_val = 0x00000000 8a809043 ]
> (+ 1240) VMENTRY
> (+ 4624) VMEXIT [ exitcode = 0x00000000, rip = 0x00000000 c016104a
> ]
> (+ 0) PAGE_FAULT [ errorcode = 0x0000000b, virt = 0x00000000
> fffb6950 ]
> (+ 2512) PAGE_FAULT1 [ write_count = 0 ]
> (+ 496) PAGE_FAULT2 [ level = 2 metaphysical = 0 access 0x00000007 ]
> (+ 48664) PAGE_FAULT3
> (+ 472) PAGE_FAULT4
> (+ 856) PAGE_FAULT5 [ shadow_ent_val = 0x80000000 9272d043 ]
> (+ 1576) VMENTRY
>
> So basically every 4th trip through the fetch function it runs
> kvm_mmu_get_page(). A summary of the entire trace file shows this function
> rarely executes in less than 50,000 cycles. Also,
> vcpu->arch.last_pt_write_count
> is always 0 when the high cycles are hit.
>
>
Ah! The flood detector is not seeing the access through the
kmap_atomic() pte, because that access has gone through the emulator.
last_updated_pte_accessed(vcpu) will never return true.
Can you verify that last_updated_pte_accessed(vcpu) indeed always
returns false?
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to
panic.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
