Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932228Ab1EQTla (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 May 2011 15:41:30 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:56770 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932169Ab1EQTl1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 May 2011 15:41:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 21:41:17 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Avi Kivity Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/5] KVM: Expose a version 1 architectural PMU to guests Message-ID: <20110517194117.GA26184@elte.hu> References: <1305129333-7456-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <1305129333-7456-6-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1305129333-7456-6-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1742 Lines: 49 * Avi Kivity wrote: > Caveats: > - counters that have PMI (interrupt) enabled stop counting after the > interrupt is signalled. This is because we need one-shot samples > that keep counting, which perf doesn't support yet Hm, do you need more than perf_event::event_limit, or something special? > - some combinations of INV and CMASK are not supported Could you please describe this better, where does this limit come from? If perf then this needs fixing. > - counters keep on counting in the host as well as the guest I suspect fixing this either needs a hw filter feature, or the ability to disable/enable these events across VM exits/entries. I would imagine the disable/enable to be rather expensive so hw help would be preferred ... I didnt see anything objectionable in your patches, but i'd like to have Peter's Acked-by as well before we go forward. I think that in the long run having a virtio-perf gateway would allow us a lot more tricks than just arch-perfmon emulation: - we could do things like propagate guest side traces over to the host - we could control from the host which events we measure on the guest side - etc. How would you like to handle the flow of patches - should we merge #1,#2,#3 in perf/core and you'd then merge #4,#5 via the KVM tree once the first bits hit upstream? We could also set up a separate branch for these three commits, which you could pull - this would allow all this to still hit .40. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/