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, 25 May 2021 16:20:56 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@suse.com>
Cc:     Stefano De Venuto <stefano.devenuto99@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
        vkuznets@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com, jmattson@google.com,
        x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, y.karadz@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move VMEnter and VMExit tracepoints closer to the actual
 event
Message-ID: <YK0j6MrOCFeQSHCa@google.com>
References: <20210519182303.2790-1-stefano.devenuto99@gmail.com>
 <YKaBEn6oUXaVAb0K@google.com>
 <5e6ad92a72e139877fa0e7a1d77682a075060d16.camel@suse.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5e6ad92a72e139877fa0e7a1d77682a075060d16.camel@suse.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 21, 2021, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> Hi Sean,
> 
> On Thu, 2021-05-20 at 15:32 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > I 100% agree that the current behavior can be a bit confusing, but I wonder
> > if we'd be better off "solving" that problem through documentation.
> > 
> Indeed. So, do you happen to have in mind what could be the best place
> and the best way for documenting this?

I didn't have anything in mind, but my gut reaction is to add a new file dedicated
to tracing/tracepoints in KVM, e.g. 

  Documentation/virt/kvm/tracepoints.rst or Documentation/virt/kvm/tracing.rst

I'm sure there are all sorts of tips and tricks people have for using KVM's
tracepoints, it would be nice to provide a way to capture and disseminate them.
My only hesitation is that Documentation/virt/kvm/ might be too formal for what
would effectively be a wiki of sorts.