On 2016/1/4 14:22, Jason Wang wrote:
On 01/04/2016 09:39 AM, Yang Zhang wrote:
On 2015/12/31 15:13, Jason Wang wrote:
This patch tries to implement an device IOTLB for vhost. This could be
used with for co-operation with userspace(qemu) implementation of
iommu for a secure DMA environment in guest.
The idea is simple. When vhost meets an IOTLB miss, it will request
the assistance of userspace to do the translation, this is done
through:
- Fill the translation request in a preset userspace address (This
address is set through ioctl VHOST_SET_IOTLB_REQUEST_ENTRY).
- Notify userspace through eventfd (This eventfd was set through ioctl
VHOST_SET_IOTLB_FD).
When userspace finishes the translation, it will update the vhost
IOTLB through VHOST_UPDATE_IOTLB ioctl. Userspace is also in charge of
snooping the IOTLB invalidation of IOMMU IOTLB and use
VHOST_UPDATE_IOTLB to invalidate the possible entry in vhost.
Is there any performance data shows the difference with IOTLB supporting?
Basic testing show it was slower than without IOTLB.
I doubt we may see performance decrease since the flush code path is
longer than before.
Yes, it also depend on the TLB hit rate.
If lots of dynamic mappings and unmappings are used in guest (e.g normal
Linux driver). This method should be much more slower since:
- lots of invalidation and its path is slow.
- the hit rate is low and the high price of userspace assisted address
translation.
- limitation of userspace IOMMU/IOTLB implementation (qemu's vtd
emulation simply empty all entries when it's full).
Another method is to implement kernel IOMMU (e.g vtd). But I'm not sure
vhost is the best place to do this, since vhost should be architecture
independent. Maybe we'd better to do it in kvm or have a pv IOMMU
implementation in vhost.
Actually, i have the kernel IOMMU(virtual vtd) patch which can pass
though the physical device to L2 guest on hand. But it is just a draft
patch which was written several years ago. If there is real requirement
for it, I can rebase it and send out it for review.
Another side, if fixed mappings were used in guest, (e.g dpdk in guest).
We have the possibility to have 100% hit rate with almost no
invalidation, the performance penalty should be ignorable, this should
be the main use case for this patch.
The patch is just a prototype for discussion. Any other ideas are welcomed.
Thanks
--
best regards
yang
--
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
