[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Make PDX compression optional



Hi,

On 16/08/2023 12:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.08.2023 13:12, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Jan,

On 16/08/2023 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.08.2023 11:36, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 02:02:16PM +0100, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
Currently there's a CONFIG_HAS_PDX Kconfig option, but it's impossible to
disable it because the whole codebase performs unconditional
compression/decompression operations on addresses. This has the
unfortunate side effect that systems without a need for compression still
have to pay the performance impact of juggling bits on every pfn<->pdx
conversion (this requires reading several global variables). This series
attempts to:

    * Leave the state of pdx and pdx compression documented
    * Factor out compression so it _can_ be removed through Kconfig
    * Make it so compression is disabled on x86 and enabled on both Aarch32
      and Aarch64 by default.

Series summary:

Patch 1 Moves hard-coded compression-related logic to helper functions
Patch 2 Refactors all instances of regions being validated for pdx
          compression conformance so it's done through a helper
Patch 3 Non-functional reorder in order to simplify the patch 8 diff
Patch 4 Adds new Kconfig option to compile out PDX compression and removes
          the old CONFIG_HAS_PDX, as it was non removable

Already committed:

v1/patch 1 documents the current general understanding of the pdx concept and
             pdx compression in particular
v1/patch 3 Marks the pdx compression globals as ro_after_init
v2/patch 1 Documents the differences between arm32 and arm64 directmaps

Alejandro Vallejo (4):
    mm: Factor out the pdx compression logic in ma/va converters
    mm/pdx: Standardize region validation wrt pdx compression
    pdx: Reorder pdx.[ch]
    pdx: Add CONFIG_PDX_COMPRESSION as a common Kconfig option

@Jan: Just making sure, are you generally ok with this series as-is?

Well, okay would be too strong; I still don't see why my runtime patching
series isn't re-considered.

Do you have a pointer to the series? I would be interested to have a look.

Sure, I can dig it out a 2nd time:
https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2018-09/msg01616.html

Thanks! AFAIU, the optimization would only happen after the alternative has been patched. This is happening after initializing the heap. With Alejandro series, you will have some performance gain for the boot which I care about.


That said... the problem with alt-patching is this is architectural
specific. Right now, this seems to be a bit unnecessary given that we
believe that virtually no-one will have a platform (I know we talked
about a potential one...) where PDX is compressing.

But it defaults to enabled on other than x86 anyway. So it seems like
it's generally wanted everywhere except on x86, and on x86 it can
(could) be patched out.

IIUC, you are saying that we would want both Alejandro series (to allow an admin to disable PDX at boot) and your series (to fully optimize the PDX at runtime). Is that correct?

If so, it is unclear to me why you want your series to be re-considered now. Can't this be done as a follow-up if there is a desire to further optimize?

Cheers,

--
Julien Grall



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.