On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:27:59AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 22/05/2017 09:04, Gonglei (Arei) wrote:
> > Hi Paolo,
> >
> > I found that the latest Qemu eat 2 time memory in KVM since Qemu-2.3.0.
> >
> > Replication Steps:
> >
> > 1. I created a CentOS 7 with 4U8G using Qemu-2.3.0,
> >
> > # grep kvm_kvzalloc /proc/vmallocinfo | awk '{total+=$2}; END {print total}'
> > 16932864
> > # grep kvm_kvzalloc /proc/vmallocinfo
> > 0xffffc900205c7000-0xffffc90020fc8000 10489856 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=2560 vmalloc vpages N1=2560
> > 0xffffc90020fc8000-0xffffc90020fce000 24576 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=5 vmalloc N1=5
> > 0xffffc90020fce000-0xffffc90020fd4000 24576 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=5 vmalloc N1=5
> > 0xffffc90020fd4000-0xffffc90020fd8000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc9002438b000-0xffffc9002498c000 6295552 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=1536 vmalloc vpages N1=1536
> > 0xffffc9002498c000-0xffffc90024990000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc90024990000-0xffffc90024994000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc90024994000-0xffffc90024997000 12288 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=2 vmalloc N1=2
> > 0xffffc90024a75000-0xffffc90024a7e000 36864 kvm_kvzalloc+0x3c/0x40 [kvm] pages=8 vmalloc N1=8
> >
> > PS: There is only this VM in my host.
> >
> > 2. Do the same test using the latest Qemu:
> >
> > # grep kvm_kvzalloc /proc/vmallocinfo | awk '{total+=$2}; END {print total}'
> > 33865728
> > linux-PsHdkO:~ # grep kvm_kvzalloc /proc/vmallocinfo
> > 0xffffc9001f181000-0xffffc9001fb82000 10489856 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=2560 vmalloc vpages N1=2560
> > 0xffffc9001fb82000-0xffffc9001fb88000 24576 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=5 vmalloc N1=5
> > 0xffffc9001fb88000-0xffffc9001fb8e000 24576 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=5 vmalloc N1=5
> > 0xffffc9001fb8e000-0xffffc9001fb92000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc90020854000-0xffffc90021255000 10489856 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=2560 vmalloc vpages N1=2560
> > 0xffffc90021255000-0xffffc9002125b000 24576 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=5 vmalloc N1=5
> > 0xffffc9002125b000-0xffffc90021261000 24576 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=5 vmalloc N1=5
> > 0xffffc90021261000-0xffffc90021265000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc9002616e000-0xffffc90026172000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc90026172000-0xffffc90026176000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc90026176000-0xffffc90026179000 12288 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=2 vmalloc N1=2
> > 0xffffc900261a9000-0xffffc900261ad000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc900261ad000-0xffffc900261b1000 16384 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=3 vmalloc N1=3
> > 0xffffc900261b1000-0xffffc900261b4000 12288 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=2 vmalloc N1=2
> > 0xffffc900280fe000-0xffffc900286ff000 6295552 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=1536 vmalloc vpages N1=1536
> > 0xffffc900286ff000-0xffffc90028d00000 6295552 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=1536 vmalloc vpages N1=1536
> > 0xffffc90028d87000-0xffffc90028d90000 36864 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=8 vmalloc N1=8
> > 0xffffc90028d9c000-0xffffc90028da5000 36864 kvm_kvzalloc+0x25/0x30 [kvm] pages=8 vmalloc N1=8
> >
> >
> > 3. I found the first bad commit by 'git biscet'
> >
> > linux-arei:/mnt/sdb/gonglei/opensource/qemu # git bisect bad
> > 6410848bec38089424d54a6a8f10d4cf77182b5d is the first bad commit
> > commit 6410848bec38089424d54a6a8f10d4cf77182b5d
> > Author: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Thu Jun 18 18:30:16 2015 +0200
> >
> > target-i386: register a separate KVM address space including SMRAM regions
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > :040000 040000 b2435d7cd0829e6416b316f1ae2856e6f7b0023d 1acb81aecaf50f2d313b33f2b61a24f7f0bd6f07 M target-i386
> > linux-PsHdkO:/mnt/sdb/gonglei/opensource/qemu #
> >
> >
> > Any ideas about this change? Do we really need to trigger two times memory region allocation?
>
> We are registering two memory maps, so yes as long as "-machine smm=on"
> is set. We can skip the second address space if SMM is disabled.
Am I right in thinking that it is just causing the same memory allocation
to be mapped twice at different addresses, not actually allocating double
the amount of memory ?
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
