[RFC PATCH] KVM: PPC: BOOK3S: HV: THP support for guest

Alexander Graf agraf at suse.de
Wed May 7 01:23:18 EST 2014


On 05/06/2014 05:06 PM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de> writes:
>
>> On 05/06/2014 11:26 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 11:12 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
> .....
>
>
> I updated the commit message as below. Let me know if this is ok.
>
>      KVM: PPC: BOOK3S: HV: THP support for guest

This has nothing to do with THP.

>      
>      On recent IBM Power CPUs, while the hashed page table is looked up using
>      the page size from the segmentation hardware (i.e. the SLB), it is
>      possible to have the HPT entry indicate a larger page size.  Thus for
>      example it is possible to put a 16MB page in a 64kB segment, but since
>      the hash lookup is done using a 64kB page size, it may be necessary to
>      put multiple entries in the HPT for a single 16MB page.  This
>      capability is called mixed page-size segment (MPSS).  With MPSS,
>      there are two relevant page sizes: the base page size, which is the
>      size used in searching the HPT, and the actual page size, which is the
>      size indicated in the HPT entry. [ Note that the actual page size is
>      always >= base page size ].
>      
>      We advertise MPSS feature to guest only if the host CPU supports the
>      same. We use "ibm,segment-page-sizes" device tree node to advertise
>      the MPSS support. The penc encoding indicate whether we support
>      a specific combination of base page size and actual page size
>      in the same segment. It is also the value used in the L|LP encoding
>      of HPTE entry.
>      
>      In-order to support MPSS in guest, KVM need to handle the below details
>      * advertise MPSS via ibm,segment-page-sizes
>      * Decode the base and actual page size correctly from the HPTE entry
>        so that we know what we are dealing with in H_ENTER and and can do

Which code path exactly changes for H_ENTER?

>        the appropriate TLB invalidation in H_REMOVE and evictions.

Apart from the grammar (which is pretty broken for the part that is not 
copied from Paul) and the subject line this sounds quite reasonable.


Alex



More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list