Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 6 Apr 2021 18:22:10 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, eranian@google.com,
        andi@firstfloor.org, kan.liang@linux.intel.com,
        wei.w.wang@intel.com, Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/16] perf/x86/intel: Handle guest PEBS overflow PMI
 for KVM guest
Message-ID: <YGyKsna7CcncX0g6@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20210329054137.120994-1-like.xu@linux.intel.com>
 <20210329054137.120994-3-like.xu@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210329054137.120994-3-like.xu@linux.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 01:41:23PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
> With PEBS virtualization, the guest PEBS records get delivered to the
> guest DS, and the host pmi handler uses perf_guest_cbs->is_in_guest()
> to distinguish whether the PMI comes from the guest code like Intel PT.
> 
> No matter how many guest PEBS counters are overflowed, only triggering
> one fake event is enough. The fake event causes the KVM PMI callback to
> be called, thereby injecting the PEBS overflow PMI into the guest.
> 
> KVM will inject the PMI with BUFFER_OVF set, even if the guest DS is
> empty. That should really be harmless. Thus the guest PEBS handler would
> retrieve the correct information from its own PEBS records buffer.
> 
> Originally-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
> Co-developed-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/events/intel/core.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> index 591d60cc8436..af9ac48fe840 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> @@ -2747,6 +2747,46 @@ static void intel_pmu_reset(void)
>  	local_irq_restore(flags);
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * We may be running with guest PEBS events created by KVM, and the
> + * PEBS records are logged into the guest's DS and invisible to host.
> + *
> + * In the case of guest PEBS overflow, we only trigger a fake event
> + * to emulate the PEBS overflow PMI for guest PBES counters in KVM.
> + * The guest will then vm-entry and check the guest DS area to read
> + * the guest PEBS records.
> + *
> + * The contents and other behavior of the guest event do not matter.
> + */
> +static int x86_pmu_handle_guest_pebs(struct pt_regs *regs,
> +					struct perf_sample_data *data)
> +{
> +	struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> +	u64 guest_pebs_idxs = cpuc->pebs_enabled & ~cpuc->intel_ctrl_host_mask;
> +	struct perf_event *event = NULL;
> +	int bit;
> +
> +	if (!x86_pmu.pebs_active || !guest_pebs_idxs)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	for_each_set_bit(bit, (unsigned long *)&guest_pebs_idxs,
> +			INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED + x86_pmu.num_counters_fixed) {
> +
> +		event = cpuc->events[bit];
> +		if (!event->attr.precise_ip)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		perf_sample_data_init(data, 0, event->hw.last_period);
> +		if (perf_event_overflow(event, data, regs))
> +			x86_pmu_stop(event, 0);
> +
> +		/* Inject one fake event is enough. */
> +		return 1;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

Why the return value, it is ignored.

> +
>  static int handle_pmi_common(struct pt_regs *regs, u64 status)
>  {
>  	struct perf_sample_data data;
> @@ -2797,7 +2837,10 @@ static int handle_pmi_common(struct pt_regs *regs, u64 status)
>  		u64 pebs_enabled = cpuc->pebs_enabled;
>  
>  		handled++;
> -		x86_pmu.drain_pebs(regs, &data);
> +		if (x86_pmu.pebs_vmx && perf_guest_cbs && perf_guest_cbs->is_in_guest())
> +			x86_pmu_handle_guest_pebs(regs, &data);
> +		else
> +			x86_pmu.drain_pebs(regs, &data);

Why is that else? Since we can't tell if the PMI was for the guest or
for our own DS, we should check both, no?