On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:33:32PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 10/11/2014 18:38, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 06:28:25PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 10/11/2014 15:23, Avi Kivity wrote: > >>> It's not surprising [1]. Since the meaning of some PTE bits change [2], > >>> the TLB has to be flushed. In VMX we have VPIDs, so we only need to flush > >>> if EFER changed between two invocations of the same VPID, which isn't the > >>> case. > >>> > >>> [1] after the fact > >>> [2] although those bits were reserved with NXE=0, so they shouldn't have > >>> any TLB footprint > >> > >> You're right that this is not that surprising after the fact, and that > >> both Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge have VPIDs (even the non-Xeon ones). > >> This is also why I'm curious about the Nehalem. > >> > >> However note that even toggling the SCE bit is flushing the TLB. The > >> NXE bit is not being toggled here! That's the more surprising part. > >> > > Just a guess, but may be because writing EFER is not something that happens > > often in regular OSes it is not optimized to handle different bits differently. > > Yes, that's what Intel said too. > > Nehalem results: > > userspace exit, urn 17560 17726 17628 17572 17417 > lightweight exit, urn 3316 3342 3342 3319 3328 > userspace exit, LOAD_EFER, guest!=host 12200 11772 12130 12164 12327 > lightweight exit, LOAD_EFER, guest!=host 3214 3220 3238 3218 3337 > userspace exit, LOAD_EFER, guest=host 11983 11780 11920 11919 12040 > lightweight exit, LOAD_EFER, guest=host 3178 3193 3193 3187 3220 > Is this with Andy's patch that skips LOAD_EFER when guest=host, or the one that always switch LOAD_EFER? -- Gleb. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
