Re: [PATCH v2 15/18] IOMMU/x86: prefill newly allocate page tables

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 10:15:37AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.12.2021 16:51, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 11:54:58AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> Page table are used for two purposes after allocation: They either start
> >> out all empty, or they get filled to replace a superpage. Subsequently,
> >> to replace all empty or fully contiguous page tables, contiguous sub-
> >> regions will be recorded within individual page tables. Install the
> >> initial set of markers immediately after allocation. Make sure to retain
> >> these markers when further populating a page table in preparation for it
> >> to replace a superpage.
> >>
> >> The markers are simply 4-bit fields holding the order value of
> >> contiguous entries. To demonstrate this, if a page table had just 16
> >> entries, this would be the initial (fully contiguous) set of markers:
> >>
> >> index  0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
> >> marker 4 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 2 0 1 0

Could you expand bit more on this explanation?

I don't get how such markers are used, or how they relate to the page
table entries. I guess the point is to note whether entries are
populated, and whether such populated entries are contiguous?

Could you provide a more visual example maybe, about what would go
into each relevant page table entry, including the marker
information?

I would like to understand this instead of trying to figure out from
the code (as then I could be making wrong assumptions).

> >>
> >> "Contiguous" here means not only present entries with successively
> >> increasing MFNs, each one suitably aligned for its slot, but also a
> >> respective number of all non-present entries.
> > 
> > I'm afraid I'm slightly lost with all this, please bear with me. Is
> > this just a performance improvement when doing super-page
> > replacements, or there's more to it?
> 
> What I wanted to strictly avoid is to have to scan entire pages for
> contiguity (i.e. on average touching half a page), like e.g.
> map_pages_to_xen() and modify_xen_mappings() do. Hence I tried to
> find a scheme where for any individual update only a predictably
> very limited number of entries need inspecting (some of these then
> of course also need updating).

Thanks. So there's some extra cost here of having to update those
markers when a page table entry is modified.

Roger.