From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
To: Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@suse.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
marcelo.cerri@canonical.com, tim.gardner@canonical.com,
khalid.elmously@canonical.com, philip.cox@canonical.com,
aarcange@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv14 5/9] efi: Add unaccepted memory support
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 19:22:10 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231013162210.bqepgz6wnh7uohqq@box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231013123358.y4pcdp5fgtt4ax6g@box.shutemov.name>
On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 03:33:58PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > While testing SNP guests running today's tip/master (ef19bc9dddc3) I ran
> > into what seems to be fairly significant lock contention due to the
> > unaccepted_memory_lock spinlock above, which results in a constant stream
> > of soft-lockups until the workload gets all its memory accepted/faulted
> > in if the guest has around 16+ vCPUs.
> >
> > I've included the guest dmesg traces I was seeing below.
> >
> > In this case I was running a 32 vCPU guest with 200GB of memory running on
> > a 256 thread EPYC (Milan) system, and can trigger the above situation fairly
> > reliably by running the following workload in a freshly-booted guests:
> >
> > stress --vm 32 --vm-bytes 5G --vm-keep
> >
> > Scaling up the number of stress threads and vCPUs should make it easier
> > to reproduce.
> >
> > Other than unresponsiveness/lockup messages until the memory is accepted,
> > the guest seems to continue running fine, but for large guests where
> > unaccepted memory is more likely to be useful, it seems like it could be
> > an issue, especially when consider 100+ vCPU guests.
>
> Okay, sorry for delay. It took time to reproduce it with TDX.
>
> I will look what can be done.
Could you check if the patch below helps?
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/unaccepted_memory.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/unaccepted_memory.c
index 853f7dc3c21d..591da3f368fa 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/efi/unaccepted_memory.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/unaccepted_memory.c
@@ -8,6 +8,14 @@
/* Protects unaccepted memory bitmap */
static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(unaccepted_memory_lock);
+struct accept_range {
+ struct list_head list;
+ unsigned long start;
+ unsigned long end;
+};
+
+static LIST_HEAD(accepting_list);
+
/*
* accept_memory() -- Consult bitmap and accept the memory if needed.
*
@@ -24,6 +32,7 @@ void accept_memory(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end)
{
struct efi_unaccepted_memory *unaccepted;
unsigned long range_start, range_end;
+ struct accept_range range, *entry;
unsigned long flags;
u64 unit_size;
@@ -80,7 +89,25 @@ void accept_memory(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end)
range_start = start / unit_size;
+ range.start = start;
+ range.end = end;
+retry:
spin_lock_irqsave(&unaccepted_memory_lock, flags);
+
+ list_for_each_entry(entry, &accepting_list, list) {
+ if (entry->end < start)
+ continue;
+ if (entry->start > end)
+ continue;
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&unaccepted_memory_lock, flags);
+
+ /* Somebody else accepting the range */
+ cpu_relax();
+ goto retry;
+ }
+
+ list_add(&range.list, &accepting_list);
+
for_each_set_bitrange_from(range_start, range_end, unaccepted->bitmap,
DIV_ROUND_UP(end, unit_size)) {
unsigned long phys_start, phys_end;
@@ -89,9 +116,15 @@ void accept_memory(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end)
phys_start = range_start * unit_size + unaccepted->phys_base;
phys_end = range_end * unit_size + unaccepted->phys_base;
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&unaccepted_memory_lock, flags);
+
arch_accept_memory(phys_start, phys_end);
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&unaccepted_memory_lock, flags);
bitmap_clear(unaccepted->bitmap, range_start, len);
}
+
+ list_del(&range.list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&unaccepted_memory_lock, flags);
}
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-13 16:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20230606142637.5171-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
[not found] ` <20230606142637.5171-6-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
2023-07-03 13:25 ` Mel Gorman
2023-07-04 14:37 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-07-12 9:18 ` Mel Gorman
2023-10-10 21:05 ` Michael Roth
2023-10-13 12:33 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-10-13 16:22 ` Kirill A. Shutemov [this message]
2023-10-13 16:44 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-13 17:27 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-10-13 21:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-10-13 17:45 ` Tom Lendacky
2023-10-13 19:53 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20231013162210.bqepgz6wnh7uohqq@box \
--to=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dfaggioli@suse.com \
--cc=jroedel@suse.de \
--cc=khalid.elmously@canonical.com \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo.cerri@canonical.com \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=michael.roth@amd.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=philip.cox@canonical.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=tim.gardner@canonical.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox