Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:4 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:4;
Message-ID: <ef6a0ebf-cb5f-0bb0-f453-0e9e0fdc87d5@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2023 18:36:49 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] KVM: x86: tracepoint updates
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     kvm@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
References: <20230924124410.897646-1-mlevitsk@redhat.com>
 <ZRIf1OPjKV66Y17/@google.com>
 <abd13162f106c5ce86c211fc9d32d901ab34500b.camel@redhat.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <abd13162f106c5ce86c211fc9d32d901ab34500b.camel@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/26/23 10:28, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
>> trace_kvm_exit is good example, where despite all of the information that is captured
>> by KVM, it's borderline worthless for CPUID and MSR exits because their interesting
>> information is held in registers and not captured in the VMCS or VMCB.
>>
>> There are some on BTF type info issues that I've encountered, but I suspect that's
>> as much a PEBKAC problem as anything.
>>
> While eBPF has its use cases, none of the extra tracepoints were added solely because of
> the monitoring tool and I do understand that tracepoints are a limited resource.
> 
> Each added tracepoint/info was added only when it was also found to be useful for regular
> kvm tracing.

I am not sure about _all_ of them, but I agree with both of you.

On one hand, it would be pretty cool to have eBPF access to registers. 
On the other hand, the specific info you're adding is generic and I 
think there are only a couple exceptions where I am not sure it belongs 
in the generic KVM tracepoints.

Paolo