[PATCH v3] Use the POWER8 Micro Partition Prefetch Engine in KVM HV on POWER8

Alexander Graf agraf at suse.de
Thu Jul 17 17:55:13 EST 2014


On 17.07.14 05:19, Stewart Smith wrote:
> The POWER8 processor has a Micro Partition Prefetch Engine, which is
> a fancy way of saying "has way to store and load contents of L2 or
> L2+MRU way of L3 cache". We initiate the storing of the log (list of
> addresses) using the logmpp instruction and start restore by writing
> to a SPR.
>
> The logmpp instruction takes parameters in a single 64bit register:
> - starting address of the table to store log of L2/L2+L3 cache contents
>    - 32kb for L2
>    - 128kb for L2+L3
>    - Aligned relative to maximum size of the table (32kb or 128kb)
> - Log control (no-op, L2 only, L2 and L3, abort logout)
>
> We should abort any ongoing logging before initiating one.
>
> To initiate restore, we write to the MPPR SPR. The format of what to write
> to the SPR is similar to the logmpp instruction parameter:
> - starting address of the table to read from (same alignment requirements)
> - table size (no data, until end of table)
> - prefetch rate (from fastest possible to slower. about every 8, 16, 24 or
>    32 cycles)
>
> The idea behind loading and storing the contents of L2/L3 cache is to
> reduce memory latency in a system that is frequently swapping vcores on
> a physical CPU.
>
> The best case scenario for doing this is when some vcores are doing very
> cache heavy workloads. The worst case is when they have about 0 cache hits,
> so we just generate needless memory operations.
>
> This implementation just does L2 store/load. In my benchmarks this proves
> to be useful.
>
> Benchmark 1:
>   - 16 core POWER8
>   - 3x Ubuntu 14.04LTS guests (LE) with 8 VCPUs each
>   - No split core/SMT
>   - two guests running sysbench memory test.
>     sysbench --test=memory --num-threads=8 run
>   - one guest running apache bench (of default HTML page)
>     ab -n 490000 -c 400 http://localhost/
>
> This benchmark aims to measure performance of real world application (apache)
> where other guests are cache hot with their own workloads. The sysbench memory
> benchmark does pointer sized writes to a (small) memory buffer in a loop.
>
> In this benchmark with this patch I can see an improvement both in requests
> per second (~5%) and in mean and median response times (again, about 5%).
> The spread of minimum and maximum response times were largely unchanged.
>
> benchmark 2:
>   - Same VM config as benchmark 1
>   - all three guests running sysbench memory benchmark
>
> This benchmark aims to see if there is a positive or negative affect to this
> cache heavy benchmark. Although due to the nature of the benchmark (stores) we
> may not see a difference in performance, but rather hopefully an improvement
> in consistency of performance (when vcore switched in, don't have to wait
> many times for cachelines to be pulled in)
>
> The results of this benchmark are improvements in consistency of performance
> rather than performance itself. With this patch, the few outliers in duration
> go away and we get more consistent performance in each guest.
>
> benchmark 3:
>   - same 3 guests and CPU configuration as benchmark 1 and 2.
>   - two idle guests
>   - 1 guest running STREAM benchmark
>
> This scenario also saw performance improvement with this patch. On Copy and
> Scale workloads from STREAM, I got 5-6% improvement with this patch. For
> Add and triad, it was around 10% (or more).
>
> benchmark 4:
>   - same 3 guests as previous benchmarks
>   - two guests running sysbench --memory, distinctly different cache heavy
>     workload
>   - one guest running STREAM benchmark.
>
> Similar improvements to benchmark 3.
>
> benchmark 5:
>   - 1 guest, 8 VCPUs, Ubuntu 14.04
>   - Host configured with split core (SMT8, subcores-per-core=4)
>   - STREAM benchmark
>
> In this benchmark, we see a 10-20% performance improvement across the board
> of STREAM benchmark results with this patch.
>
> Based on preliminary investigation and microbenchmarks
> by Prerna Saxena <prerna at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Stewart Smith <stewart at linux.vnet.ibm.com>

A lot nicer :)

>
> --
> changes since v2:
> - based on feedback from Alexander Graf:
>    - move save and restore of cache to separate functions
>    - move allocation of mpp_buffer to vcore creation
>    - get_free_pages() does actually allocate pages aligned to order
>      (Mel Gorman confirms)
>    - make SPR and logmpp parameters a bit less magic, especially around abort
>
> changes since v1:
> - s/mppe/mpp_buffer/
> - add MPP_BUFFER_ORDER define.
> ---
>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h   |    2 +
>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h |   17 +++++++
>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h        |    1 +
>   arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c          |   89 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>   4 files changed, 98 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 1eaea2d..5769497 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -305,6 +305,8 @@ struct kvmppc_vcore {
>   	u32 arch_compat;
>   	ulong pcr;
>   	ulong dpdes;		/* doorbell state (POWER8) */
> +	unsigned long mpp_buffer; /* Micro Partition Prefetch buffer */

Just make this a void*?

> +	bool mpp_buffer_is_valid;
>   };
>   
>   #define VCORE_ENTRY_COUNT(vc)	((vc)->entry_exit_count & 0xff)
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h
> index 3132bb9..c636841 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h
> @@ -139,6 +139,7 @@
>   #define PPC_INST_ISEL			0x7c00001e
>   #define PPC_INST_ISEL_MASK		0xfc00003e
>   #define PPC_INST_LDARX			0x7c0000a8
> +#define PPC_INST_LOGMPP			0x7c0007e4
>   #define PPC_INST_LSWI			0x7c0004aa
>   #define PPC_INST_LSWX			0x7c00042a
>   #define PPC_INST_LWARX			0x7c000028
> @@ -275,6 +276,20 @@
>   #define __PPC_EH(eh)	0
>   #endif
>   
> +/* POWER8 Micro Partition Prefetch (MPP) parameters */
> +/* Address mask is common for LOGMPP instruction and MPPR SPR */
> +#define PPC_MPPE_ADDRESS_MASK 0xffffffffc000
> +
> +/* Bits 60 and 61 of MPP SPR should be set to one of the following */
> +/* Aborting the fetch is indeed setting 00 in the table size bits */
> +#define PPC_MPPR_FETCH_ABORT (0x0ULL << 60)
> +#define PPC_MPPR_FETCH_WHOLE_TABLE (0x2ULL << 60)
> +
> +/* Bits 54 and 55 of register for LOGMPP instruction should be set to: */
> +#define PPC_LOGMPP_LOG_L2 (0x02ULL << 54)
> +#define PPC_LOGMPP_LOG_L2L3 (0x01ULL << 54)
> +#define PPC_LOGMPP_LOG_ABORT (0x03ULL << 54)
> +
>   /* Deal with instructions that older assemblers aren't aware of */
>   #define	PPC_DCBAL(a, b)		stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_DCBAL | \
>   					__PPC_RA(a) | __PPC_RB(b))
> @@ -283,6 +298,8 @@
>   #define PPC_LDARX(t, a, b, eh)	stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_LDARX | \
>   					___PPC_RT(t) | ___PPC_RA(a) | \
>   					___PPC_RB(b) | __PPC_EH(eh))
> +#define PPC_LOGMPP(b)		stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_LOGMPP | \
> +					__PPC_RB(b))
>   #define PPC_LWARX(t, a, b, eh)	stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_LWARX | \
>   					___PPC_RT(t) | ___PPC_RA(a) | \
>   					___PPC_RB(b) | __PPC_EH(eh))
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h
> index e5d2e0b..5164beb 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h
> @@ -224,6 +224,7 @@
>   #define   CTRL_TE	0x00c00000	/* thread enable */
>   #define   CTRL_RUNLATCH	0x1
>   #define SPRN_DAWR	0xB4
> +#define SPRN_MPPR	0xB8	/* Micro Partition Prefetch Register */
>   #define SPRN_CIABR	0xBB
>   #define   CIABR_PRIV		0x3
>   #define   CIABR_PRIV_USER	1
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> index 8227dba..b5a8b11 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,13 @@
>   /* Used as a "null" value for timebase values */
>   #define TB_NIL	(~(u64)0)
>   
> +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_64K_PAGES)
> +#define MPP_BUFFER_ORDER	0
> +#elif defined(CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES)
> +#define MPP_BUFFER_ORDER	4
> +#endif
> +
> +
>   static void kvmppc_end_cede(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>   static int kvmppc_hv_setup_htab_rma(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>   
> @@ -1258,6 +1265,32 @@ static int kvmppc_set_one_reg_hv(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 id,
>   	return r;
>   }
>   
> +static struct kvmppc_vcore *kvmppc_vcore_create(struct kvm *kvm, int core)
> +{
> +	struct kvmppc_vcore *vcore;
> +
> +	vcore = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kvmppc_vcore), GFP_KERNEL);
> +
> +	if (vcore == NULL)
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vcore->runnable_threads);
> +	spin_lock_init(&vcore->lock);
> +	init_waitqueue_head(&vcore->wq);
> +	vcore->preempt_tb = TB_NIL;
> +	vcore->lpcr = kvm->arch.lpcr;
> +	vcore->first_vcpuid = core * threads_per_core;
> +	vcore->kvm = kvm;
> +
> +	vcore->mpp_buffer_is_valid = false;
> +
> +	if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_207S))
> +		vcore->mpp_buffer = __get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_ZERO,
> +						     MPP_BUFFER_ORDER);
> +
> +	return vcore;
> +}
> +
>   static struct kvm_vcpu *kvmppc_core_vcpu_create_hv(struct kvm *kvm,
>   						   unsigned int id)
>   {
> @@ -1298,16 +1331,7 @@ static struct kvm_vcpu *kvmppc_core_vcpu_create_hv(struct kvm *kvm,
>   	mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
>   	vcore = kvm->arch.vcores[core];
>   	if (!vcore) {
> -		vcore = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kvmppc_vcore), GFP_KERNEL);
> -		if (vcore) {
> -			INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vcore->runnable_threads);
> -			spin_lock_init(&vcore->lock);
> -			init_waitqueue_head(&vcore->wq);
> -			vcore->preempt_tb = TB_NIL;
> -			vcore->lpcr = kvm->arch.lpcr;
> -			vcore->first_vcpuid = core * threads_per_core;
> -			vcore->kvm = kvm;
> -		}
> +		vcore = kvmppc_vcore_create(kvm, core);
>   		kvm->arch.vcores[core] = vcore;
>   		kvm->arch.online_vcores++;
>   	}
> @@ -1516,6 +1540,37 @@ static int on_primary_thread(void)
>   	return 1;
>   }
>   
> +static void ppc_start_saving_l2_cache(struct kvmppc_vcore *vc)

Please use the "kvmppc" name space.

> +{
> +	phys_addr_t phy_addr, tmp;
> +
> +	phy_addr = (phys_addr_t)virt_to_phys((void *)vc->mpp_buffer);
> +
> +	tmp = phy_addr & PPC_MPPE_ADDRESS_MASK;

I would prefer if you give the variable a more telling name.

> +
> +	mtspr(SPRN_MPPR, tmp | PPC_MPPR_FETCH_ABORT);
> +
> +	asm volatile(PPC_LOGMPP(R1) : : "r" (tmp | PPC_LOGMPP_LOG_L2));

Can you move this asm() into a static inline function in generic code 
somewhere?

> +
> +	vc->mpp_buffer_is_valid = true;

Where does this ever get unset? And what point does this variable make? 
Can't you just check on if (vc->mpp_buffer)?

Also, a single whitespace line between every instruction you do looks 
weird ;). When you have the feeling that the code flow is weird enough 
that you need empty lines between every real line, there's probably 
something wrong in the code flow :).


Alex

> +}
> +
> +static void ppc_start_restoring_l2_cache(const struct kvmppc_vcore *vc)
> +{
> +	phys_addr_t phy_addr, tmp;
> +
> +	phy_addr = virt_to_phys((void *)vc->mpp_buffer);
> +
> +	tmp = phy_addr & PPC_MPPE_ADDRESS_MASK;
> +
> +	/* We must abort any in-progress save operations to ensure
> +	 * the table is valid so that prefetch engine knows when to
> +	 * stop prefetching. */
> +	asm volatile(PPC_LOGMPP(R1) : : "r" (tmp | PPC_LOGMPP_LOG_ABORT));
> +
> +	mtspr(SPRN_MPPR, tmp | PPC_MPPR_FETCH_WHOLE_TABLE);
> +}
> +
>   /*
>    * Run a set of guest threads on a physical core.
>    * Called with vc->lock held.
> @@ -1590,9 +1645,16 @@ static void kvmppc_run_core(struct kvmppc_vcore *vc)
>   
>   	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&vc->kvm->srcu);
>   
> +	if (vc->mpp_buffer_is_valid)
> +		ppc_start_restoring_l2_cache(vc);
> +
>   	__kvmppc_vcore_entry();
>   
>   	spin_lock(&vc->lock);
> +
> +	if (vc->mpp_buffer)
> +		ppc_start_saving_l2_cache(vc);
> +
>   	/* disable sending of IPIs on virtual external irqs */
>   	list_for_each_entry(vcpu, &vc->runnable_threads, arch.run_list)
>   		vcpu->cpu = -1;
> @@ -2329,8 +2391,13 @@ static void kvmppc_free_vcores(struct kvm *kvm)
>   {
>   	long int i;
>   
> -	for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCORES; ++i)
> +	for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCORES; ++i) {
> +		if (kvm->arch.vcores[i] && kvm->arch.vcores[i]->mpp_buffer) {
> +			free_pages(kvm->arch.vcores[i]->mpp_buffer,
> +				   MPP_BUFFER_ORDER);
> +		}
>   		kfree(kvm->arch.vcores[i]);
> +	}
>   	kvm->arch.online_vcores = 0;
>   }
>   



More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list