We will test this as well. K. Y -----Original Message----- From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 10:38 AM To: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx; kvm <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>; Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx>; vkuznets <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx>; KY Srinivasan <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; yi.y.sun@xxxxxxxxx; chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx; isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] x86/kernel/hyper-v: xmm fast hypercall On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 06:02:58AM +0100, Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 05:50, Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > This patch series implements xmm fast hypercall for hyper-v as guest > > and kvm support as VMM. > > With this patch, HVCALL_FLUSH_VIRTUAL_ADDRESS_SPACE without gva > > list, HVCALL_FLUSH_VIRTUAL_ADDRESS_SPACE_EX(vcpu > 64) and > > HVCALL_SEND_IPI_EX(vcpu > 64) can use xmm fast hypercall. > > > > benchmark result: > > At the moment, my test machine have only pcpu=4, ipi benchmark > > doesn't > > Did you evaluate xmm fast hypercall for pv ipis? In addition, testing > on a large server can provide a forceful evidence. Please see the below results which was done without the changeset of 4bd06060762b to use xmm fasthypercall forcibly with vcpu=4. Right now I'm looking for a machine with pcpu > 64, but it would take a while. I wanted to sent out the patch early so that someone else can test/benchmark it. Thanks, > > Regards, > Wanpeng Li > > > make any behaviour change. So for now I measured the time of > > hyperv_flush_tlb_others() by ktap with 'hardinfo -r -f text'. > > the average of 5 runs are as follows. > > (When large machine with pcpu > 64 is avaialble, ipi_benchmark > > result is interesting. But not yet now.) > > > > hyperv_flush_tlb_others() time by hardinfo -r -f text: > > > > with path: 9931 ns > > without patch: 11111 ns > > > > > > With patch of 4bd06060762b, __send_ipi_mask() now uses fast > > hypercall when possible. so in the case of vcpu=4. So I used kernel > > before the parch to measure the effect of xmm fast hypercall with ipi_benchmark. > > The following is the average of 100 runs. > > > > ipi_benchmark: average of 100 runs without 4bd06060762b > > > > with patch: > > Dry-run 0 495181 > > Self-IPI 11352737 21549999 > > Normal IPI 499400218 575433727 > > Broadcast IPI 0 1700692010 > > Broadcast lock 0 1663001374 > > > > without patch: > > Dry-run 0 607657 > > Self-IPI 10915950 21217644 > > Normal IPI 621712609 735015570 > > Broadcast IPI 0 2173803373 > > Broadcast lock 0 2150451543 > > > > Isaku Yamahata (6): > > x86/kernel/hyper-v: xmm fast hypercall as guest > > x86/hyperv: use hv_do_hypercall for __send_ipi_mask_ex() > > x86/hyperv: use hv_do_hypercall for flush_virtual_address_space_ex > > hyperv: use hv_do_hypercall instead of hv_do_fast_hypercall > > x86/kvm/hyperv: implement xmm fast hypercall > > local: hyperv: test ex hypercall > > > > arch/x86/hyperv/hv_apic.c | 16 +++- > > arch/x86/hyperv/mmu.c | 24 +++-- > > arch/x86/hyperv/nested.c | 2 +- > > arch/x86/include/asm/hyperv-tlfs.h | 3 + > > arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h | 180 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > arch/x86/kvm/hyperv.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++---- > > drivers/hv/connection.c | 3 +- > > drivers/hv/hv.c | 3 +- > > drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c | 7 +- > > 9 files changed, 291 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.14.1 > > -- Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx>
