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, 18 May 2021 15:36:06 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     "Xu, Like" <like.xu@intel.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, weijiang.yang@intel.com,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>, ak@linux.intel.com,
        wei.w.wang@intel.com, eranian@google.com, liuxiangdong5@huawei.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 07/16] KVM: x86/pmu: Reprogram PEBS event to emulate
 guest PEBS counter
Message-ID: <YKPCxnKc1MGqXsJ4@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20210511024214.280733-1-like.xu@linux.intel.com>
 <20210511024214.280733-8-like.xu@linux.intel.com>
 <YKIz/J1HoOvbmR42@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <2d874bce-2823-13b4-0714-3de5b7c475f0@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <2d874bce-2823-13b4-0714-3de5b7c475f0@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 09:28:52PM +0800, Xu, Like wrote:

> > How would pebs && !intr be possible?
> 
> I don't think it's possible.

And yet you keep that 'intr||pebs' weirdness :/

> > Also; wouldn't this be more legible
> > when written like:
> > 
> > 	perf_overflow_handler_t ovf = kvm_perf_overflow;
> > 
> > 	...
> > 
> > 	if (intr)
> > 		ovf = kvm_perf_overflow_intr;
> > 
> > 	...
> > 
> > 	event = perf_event_create_kernel_counter(&attr, -1, current, ovf, pmc);
> > 
> 
> Please yell if you don't like this:
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> index 711294babb97..a607f5a1b9cd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
> @@ -122,6 +122,8 @@ static void pmc_reprogram_counter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc,
> u32 type,
> ??????????????? .config = config,
> ??????? };
> ??????? bool pebs = test_bit(pmc->idx, (unsigned long *)&pmu->pebs_enable);
> +?????? perf_overflow_handler_t ovf = (intr || pebs) ?
> +?????????????? kvm_perf_overflow_intr : kvm_perf_overflow;

This, that's exactly the kind of code I wanted to get rid of. ?: has
it's place I suppose, but you're creating dense ugly code for no reason.

	perf_overflow_handle_t ovf = kvm_perf_overflow;

	if (intr)
		ovf = kvm_perf_overflow_intr;

Is so much easier to read. And if you really worry about that pebs
thing; you can add:

	WARN_ON_ONCE(pebs && !intr);