[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] VT-d Posted-interrupt (PI) design for XEN
On 04/03/15 13:30, Wu, Feng wrote: > VT-d Posted-interrupt (PI) design for XEN Thankyou very much for this! > > Background > ========== > With the development of virtualization, there are more and more device > assignment requirements. However, today when a VM is running with > assigned devices (such as, NIC), external interrupt handling for the assigned > devices always needs VMM intervention. > > VT-d Posted-interrupt is a more enhanced method to handle interrupts > in the virtualization environment. Interrupt posting is the process by > which an interrupt request is recorded in a memory-resident > posted-interrupt-descriptor structure by the root-complex, followed by > an optional notification event issued to the CPU complex. > > With VT-d Posted-interrupt we can get the following advantages: > - Directly delivery of external interrupts to running vCPUs without VMM > intervention > - Decease the interrupt migration complexity. On vCPU migration, software > can atomically co-migrate all interrupts targeting the migrating vCPU. I presume you mean "Decrease" ? "Decease" means something quite different. > > > Posted-interrupt Introduction > ======================== > There are two components to the Posted-interrupt architecture: > Processor Support and Root-Complex Support > > - Processor Support > Posted-interrupt processing is a feature by which a processor processes > the virtual interrupts by recording them as pending on the virtual-APIC > page. > > Posted-interrupt processing is enabled by setting the "process posted > interrupts" VM-execution control. The processing is performed in response > to the arrival of an interrupt with the posted-interrupt notification vector. > In response to such an interrupt, the processor processes virtual interrupts > recorded in a data structure called a posted-interrupt descriptor. > > More information about APICv and CPU-side Posted-interrupt, please refer > to Chapter 29, and Section 29.6 in the Intel SDM: > http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/manuals/64-ia-32-architectures-software-developer-manual-325462.pdf > > - Root-Complex Support > Interrupt posting is the process by which an interrupt request (from IOAPIC > or MSI/MSIx capable sources) is recorded in a memory-resident > posted-interrupt-descriptor structure by the root-complex, followed by > an optional notification event issued to the CPU complex. The interrupt > request arriving at the root-complex carry the identity of the interrupt > request source and a 'remapping-index'. The remapping-index is used to > look-up an entry from the memory-resident interrupt-remap-table. Unlike > with interrupt-remapping, the interrupt-remap-table-entry for a posted- > interrupt, specifies a virtual-vector and a pointer to the posted-interrupt > descriptor. The virtual-vector specifies the vector of the interrupt to be > recorded in the posted-interrupt descriptor. The posted-interrupt descriptor > hosts storage for the virtual-vectors and contains the attributes of the > notification event (interrupt) to be issued to the CPU complex to inform > CPU/software about pending interrupts recorded in the posted-interrupt > descriptor. > > More information about VT-d PI, please refer to > http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/intelligent-systems/intel-technology/vt-directed-io-spec.html > > > Design Overview > ============== > In this design, we will cover the following items: > 1. Add a variant to control whether enable VT-d posted-interrupt or not. > 2. VT-d PI feature detection. > 3. Extend posted-interrupt descriptor structure to cover VT-d PI specific > stuff. > 4. Extend IRTE structure to support VT-d PI. > 5. Introduce a new global vector which is used for waking up the HLT'ed vCPU. > 6. Update IRTE when guest modifies the interrupt configuration (MSI/MSIx > configuration). > 7. Update posted-interrupt descriptor during vCPU scheduling (when the state > of the vCPU is transmitted among RUNSTATE_running / RUNSTATE_blocked/ > RUNSTATE_runnable / RUNSTATE_offline). > 8. New boot command line for Xen, which controls VT-d PI feature by user. > 9. Multicast/broadcast and lowest priority interrupts consideration. > > > Implementation details > =================== > - New variant to control VT-d PI I know what you are trying to say, but "New variant" does not express what you mean. "A new control relating to VT-d PI" perhaps? > Like variant 'iommu_intremap' for interrupt remapping, it is very > straightforward > to add a new one 'iommu_intpost' for posted-interrupt. 'iommu_intpost' is set > only when interrupt remapping and VT-d posted-interrupt are both enabled. I would avoid mixing names such as PI and intpost. If anything, it should be "iommu_postint" to keep the naming consistent. (Here and elsewhere). > > - VT-d PI feature detection. > Bit 59 in VT-d Capability Register is used to report VT-d Posted-interrupt > support. > > - Extend posted-interrupt descriptor structure to cover VT-d PI specific > stuff. > Here is the new structure for posted-interrupt descriptor: > > struct pi_desc { > DECLARE_BITMAP(pir, NR_VECTORS); > union { > struct > { > u64 on : 1, > sn : 1, > rsvd_1 : 13, > ndm : 1, > nv : 8, > rsvd_2 : 8, > ndst : 32; > }; > u64 control; > }; > u32 rsvd[6]; > } __attribute__ ((aligned (64))); Is there a pending update to the system programming guide? According to 325384.pdf, only the Oustanding Notification is defined, and all others are reserved for software use. I however noticed that these fields match up with the description of a posted interrupt descriptor in the VT-d spec. Are they supposed to be the same structure in memory used by both the cpu and root complex, or independent structures which happen to look very similar? > > - Extend IRTE structure to support VT-d PI. > Here is the new structure for IRTE: > /* interrupt remap entry */ > struct iremap_entry { > union { > u64 lo_val; > struct { > u64 p : 1, > fpd : 1, > dm : 1, > rh : 1, > tm : 1, > dlm : 3, > avail : 4, > res_1 : 4, > vector : 8, > res_2 : 8, > dst : 32; > }lo; > struct { > u64 p : 1, > fpd : 1, > res_1 : 6, > avail : 4, > res_2 : 2, > urg : 1, > pst : 1, > vector : 8, > res_3 : 14, > pda_l : 26; > }lo_intpost; > }; > union { > u64 hi_val; > struct { > u64 sid : 16, > sq : 2, > svt : 2, > res_1 : 44; > }hi; > struct { > u64 sid : 16, > sq : 2, > svt : 2, > res_1 : 12, > pda_h : 32; > }hi_intpost; > }; > }; None of the bitfields contain the IM field (bit 15) which is stated as the qualification between the two interpretations of the IRTE. Also, I feel that the structure would be better layed out as: struct iremap_entry { union { struct { u64 lo, hi; }; struct { <bitfields> } norm; (names subject to improvement) struct { <bitfields> } post; }; }; Which does not duplicate the lo and hi u64s in sub-unions. (This will involve some refactoring of the existing code.) > > - Introduce a new global vector which is used to wake up the HLT'ed vCPU. > Currently, there is a global vector 'posted_intr_vector', which is used as the > global notification vector for all vCPUs in the system. This vector is stored > in > VMCS and CPU considers it as a special vector, uses it to notify the related > pCPU when an interrupt is recorded in the posted-interrupt descriptor. > > After having VT-d PI, VT-d engine can issue notification event when the > assigned devices issue interrupts. We need add a new global vector to > wakeup the HLT'ed vCPU, please refer to the following scenario for the > usage of this new global vector: > > 1. vCPU0 is running on pCPU0 > 2. vCPU0 is HLT'ed and vCPU1 is currently running on pCPU0 I don't understand what you are trying to express with this scenario. vCPU0 cannot be running on pCPU0 and also halted with vCPU1 running on pCPU0. A vCPU is either running, in which case it has an associated pCPU, or it is not running and has no specific pCPU affiliation. ~Andrew > 3. An external interrupt from an assigned device occurs for vCPU0, if we > still use 'posted_intr_vector' as the notification vector for vCPU0, the > notification event for vCPU0 (the event will go to pCPU1) will be consumed > by vCPU1 incorrectly. The worst case is that vCPU0 will never be woken up > again since the wakeup event for it is always consumed by other vCPUs > incorrectly. So we need introduce another global vector, naming > 'pi_wakeup_vector' > to wake up the HTL'ed vCPU. > > - Update IRTE when guest modifies the interrupt configuration (MSI/MSIx > configuration). > After VT-d PI is introduced, the format of IRTE is changed as follows: > Descriptor Address: the address of the posted-interrupt descriptor > Virtual Vector: the guest vector of the interrupt > URG: indicates if the interrupt is urgent > Other fields continue to have the same meaning > > 'Descriptor Address' tells the destination vCPU of this interrupt, since > each vCPU has a dedicated posted-interrupt descriptor. > > 'Virtual Vector' tells the guest vector of the interrupt. > > When guest changes the configuration of the interrupts, such as, the > cpu affinity, or the vector, we need to update the associated IRTE > accordingly. > > - Update posted-interrupt descriptor during vCPU scheduling > The basic idea here is: > 1. When vCPU's state is RUNSTATE_running, > - Set 'NV' to 'posted_intr_vector'. > - Clear 'SN' to accept posted-interrupts. > - Set 'NDST' to the pCPU on which the vCPU will be running. > 2. When vCPU's state is RUNSTATE_blocked, > - Set 'NV' to ' pi_wakeup_vector ', so we can wake up the > related vCPU when posted-interrupt happens for it. > Please refer to the above section about the new global vector. > - Clear 'SN' to accept posted-interrupts > 3. When vCPU's state is RUNSTATE_runnable/RUNSTATE_offline, > - Set 'SN' to suppress non-urgent interrupts > (Current, we only support non-urgent interrupts) > When vCPU is in RUNSTATE_runnable or RUNSTATE_offline, > It is not needed to accept posted-interrupt notification event, > since we don't change the behavior of scheduler when the interrupt > occurs, we still need wait the next scheduling of the vCPU. > When external interrupts from assigned devices occur, the interrupts > are recorded in PIR, and will be synced to IRR before VM-Entry. > - Set 'NV' to 'posted_intr_vector'. > > - New boot command line for Xen, which controls VT-d PI feature by user. > Like 'intremap' for interrupt remapping, we add a new boot command line > 'intpost' for posted-interrupts. > > - Multicast/broadcast and lowest priority interrupts consideration > With VT-d PI, the destination vCPU information of an external interrupt > from assigned devices is stored in IRTE, this makes the following > consideration of the design: > 1. Multicast/broadcast interrupts cannot be posted. > 2. For lowest-priority interrupts, new Intel CPU/Chipset/root-complex > (starting from Nehalem) ignore TPR value, and instead supported two other > ways (configurable by BIOS) on how the handle lowest priority interrupts: > A) Round robin: In this method, the chipset simply delivers lowest > priority > interrupts in a round-robin manner across all the available logical CPUs. > While > this provides good load balancing, this was not the best thing to do always as > interrupts from the same device (like NIC) will start running on all the CPUs > thrashing caches and taking locks. This led to the next scheme. > B) Vector hashing: In this method, hardware would apply a hash function > on the vector value in the interrupt request, and use that hash to pick a > logical > CPU to route the lowest priority interrupt. This way, a given vector always > goes > to the same logical CPU, avoiding the thrashing problem above. > > So, gist of above is that, lowest priority interrupts has never been > delivered as > "lowest priority" in physical hardware. > > For KVM enabling work of VT-d PI, we divide this into two stage: > Stage 1: Only support single-CPU lowest-priority interrupts (configured via > /proc/irq or irqbalance). This is simple and clear. > Stage 2: After all the patches are merged, I will add the vector hashing > support > for lowest-priority on VT-d PI. > > On Xen side, what is your opinion about support lowest-priority interrupts > for VT-d PI? > > ================================ > > Any comments about this design are highly appreciated! > > Thanks, > Feng > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |