On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 22:09:35 +0000 Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > We keep track of several kernel memory stats (total kernel memory, page > tables, stack, vmalloc, etc) on multiple levels (global, per-node, > per-memcg, etc). These stats give insights to users to how much memory > is used by the kernel and for what purposes. > > Currently, memory used by kvm mmu is not accounted in any of those > kernel memory stats. This patch series accounts the memory pages > used by KVM for page tables in those stats in a new > NR_SECONDARY_PAGETABLE stat. This stat can be later extended to account > for other types of secondary pages tables (e.g. iommu page tables). > > KVM has a decent number of large allocations that aren't for page > tables, but for most of them, the number/size of those allocations > scales linearly with either the number of vCPUs or the amount of memory > assigned to the VM. KVM's secondary page table allocations do not scale > linearly, especially when nested virtualization is in use. > > >From a KVM perspective, NR_SECONDARY_PAGETABLE will scale with KVM's > per-VM pages_{4k,2m,1g} stats unless the guest is doing something > bizarre (e.g. accessing only 4kb chunks of 2mb pages so that KVM is > forced to allocate a large number of page tables even though the guest > isn't accessing that much memory). However, someone would need to either > understand how KVM works to make that connection, or know (or be told) to > go look at KVM's stats if they're running VMs to better decipher the stats. > > Furthermore, having NR_PAGETABLE side-by-side with NR_SECONDARY_PAGETABLE > is informative. For example, when backing a VM with THP vs. HugeTLB, > NR_SECONDARY_PAGETABLE is roughly the same, but NR_PAGETABLE is an order > of magnitude higher with THP. So having this stat will at the very least > prove to be useful for understanding tradeoffs between VM backing types, > and likely even steer folks towards potential optimizations. > > The original discussion with more details about the rationale: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/87ilqoi77b.wl-maz@xxxxxxxxxx > > This stat will be used by subsequent patches to count KVM mmu > memory usage. Nits and triviata: > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst > @@ -977,6 +977,7 @@ Example output. You may not have all of these fields. > SUnreclaim: 142336 kB > KernelStack: 11168 kB > PageTables: 20540 kB > + SecPageTables: 0 kB > NFS_Unstable: 0 kB > Bounce: 0 kB > WritebackTmp: 0 kB > @@ -1085,6 +1086,9 @@ KernelStack > Memory consumed by the kernel stacks of all tasks > PageTables > Memory consumed by userspace page tables > +SecPageTables > + Memory consumed by secondary page tables, this currently > + currently includes KVM mmu allocations on x86 and arm64. Something happened to the whitespace there. > + "Node %d SecPageTables: %8lu kB\n" > ... > + nid, K(node_page_state(pgdat, NR_SECONDARY_PAGETABLE)), The use of "sec" in the user-facing changes and "secondary" in the programmer-facing changes is irksome. Can we be consistent? I'd prefer "secondary" throughout. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm