[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH qemu 1/4] memory: Postpone flatview and disp
From: |
Alexey Kardashevskiy |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH qemu 1/4] memory: Postpone flatview and dispatch tree building till all devices are added |
Date: |
Fri, 8 Sep 2017 00:27:03 +1000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 |
On 07/09/17 19:30, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 7 September 2017 at 10:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Most devices use at least one address space and every time a new address
>> space is added, flat views and dispatch trees are rebuild for all address
>> spaces. This is not a problem for a relatively small amount of devices but
>> even 50 virtio-pci devices use more than 8GB of RAM.
>>
>> What happens that on every flatview/dispatch rebuild, new arrays are
>> allocated and old ones release but the release is done via RCU so until
>> an entire machine is build, they are not released.
>>
>> This wraps devices creation into memory_region_transaction_begin/commit
>> to massively reduce amount of flat view/dispatch tree (re)allocations.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <address@hidden>
>> ---
>> vl.c | 4 ++++
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
>> index 8e247cc2a2..3c39cc8b3a 100644
>> --- a/vl.c
>> +++ b/vl.c
>> @@ -4655,12 +4655,16 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
>> igd_gfx_passthru();
>>
>> /* init generic devices */
>> + memory_region_transaction_begin();
>> +
>> rom_set_order_override(FW_CFG_ORDER_OVERRIDE_DEVICE);
>> if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("device"),
>> device_init_func, NULL, NULL)) {
>> exit(1);
>> }
>>
>> + memory_region_transaction_commit();
>
> What happens if something in a device realize function tries
> to do a read from an AddressSpace?
address_space_memory is created before that loop but yes, address spaces
for devices are not rendered and QEMU crashes, needs fixing.
> I can't think of any examples
> that need to do that and I suspect it's probably a bug if anybody
> tries it, but I'm curious whether this change alters the failure
> mode...
--
Alexey