Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210201051039.255478-1-like.xu@linux.intel.com>
 <CALMp9eRC2APJgB3Y7S4MWsTs9wom3iQycd60kM2eJg39N_L4Ag@mail.gmail.com> <ec0f97e9-33b7-61d8-25b8-50175544dbdd@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ec0f97e9-33b7-61d8-25b8-50175544dbdd@gmail.com>
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2022 11:08:28 -0700
Message-ID: <CALMp9eRAv_7UOL8K+15_UsV9ML5M3rnh-Rz2C1GtTkZCHt4Yjg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 00/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Guest Last Branch Recording Enabling
To:     Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, ak@linux.intel.com,
        wei.w.wang@intel.com, kan.liang@intel.com,
        alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 12:26 AM Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 14/9/2022 7:42 am, Jim Mattson wrote:
> > How does live migration work? I don't see any mechanism for recording
> > the current LBR MSRs on suspend or restoring them on resume.
>
> Considering that LBR is still a model specific feature, migration is less
> valuable unless
> both LBR_FMT values of the migration side are the same, the compatibility check
> (based on cpu models) is required (gathering dust in my to-do list);

This seems like a problem best solved in the control plane.

> and there is another dusty missing piece is how to ensure that vcpu can get LBR
> hardware in
> vmx transition when KVM lbr event fails in host lbr event competition, the
> complexity here is
> that the host and guest may have different LBR filtering options.

In case of a conflict, who currently wins? The host or the guest? I'd
like the guest to win, but others may feel differently. Maybe we need
a configuration knob?

> The good news is the Architecture LBR will add save/restore support since Paolo
> is not averse to
> putting more msr's into msrs_to_save_all[], perhaps a dynamic addition mechanism
> is a prerequisite.
>
> Please let me know what your priority preferences are for these tasks above.