From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66940C2D0C0 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:11:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA387206D3 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:10:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EA387206D3 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D61A4AF2F; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 07:10:58 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LdfzhVG-HUqw; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 07:10:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91BFE4AF18; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 07:10:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18734AEE6 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 07:10:56 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vNpuGVbLWCGe for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 07:10:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from inca-roads.misterjones.org (inca-roads.misterjones.org [213.251.177.50]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1320E4AF08 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 07:10:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from 78.163-31-62.static.virginmediabusiness.co.uk ([62.31.163.78] helo=big-swifty.misterjones.org) by cheepnis.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ij04T-0007sI-T2; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 13:10:54 +0100 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:10:52 +0000 Message-ID: <865zi8imr7.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Marc Zyngier To: Andrew Murray Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/18] perf: arm_spe: Handle guest/host exclusion flags In-Reply-To: <20191220143025.33853-16-andrew.murray@arm.com> References: <20191220143025.33853-1-andrew.murray@arm.com> <20191220143025.33853-16-andrew.murray@arm.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/26 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 62.31.163.78 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: andrew.murray@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cheepnis.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 14:30:22 +0000, Andrew Murray wrote: > > A side effect of supporting the SPE in guests is that we prevent the > host from collecting data whilst inside a guest thus creating a black-out > window. This occurs because instead of emulating the SPE, we share it > with our guests. > > Let's accurately describe our capabilities by using the perf exclude > flags to prevent !exclude_guest and exclude_host flags from being used. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Murray > --- > drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > index 2d24af4cfcab..3703dbf459de 100644 > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > @@ -679,6 +679,9 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event *event) > if (attr->exclude_idle) > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > + if (!attr->exclude_guest || attr->exclude_host) > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + I have the opposite approach. If the host decides to profile the guest, why should that be denied? If there is a black hole, it should take place in the guest. Today, the host does expect this to work, and there is no way that we unconditionally allow it to regress. M. -- Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0DCAC2D0C0 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:11:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84CCA206D3 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:11:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="FXoBovgF" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 84CCA206D3 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To: Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=IT/PvZfyD1yC+8iw4qU8u5sluQjRz/Bb9Zm/CEPULgo=; b=FXoBovgFgC7yYi NOEoqG1lWHhFTunAOilrj04236L3wiJma0VZHq0jgd8SwcpwHzr1EEcdaBKgTKvjQJivOiTjS+Cku q9BF30XSSphMss1R6TzO/ULyLBoZFVb0hsTrUejFqLmK4rQczTiL7sbQ9AgGXlwnJDbmgmZEsL+uL NeHKz7Z6Uv1qtC3gSHvxwPa7qSGvHQwgS4Mk66m8KGZHUPOSVmh5I8YD0kbUS9F2JNG1cqnuQh1OS XkGRyTB7kJSxPQzXoakPL1ZA0+nJYU1BJNk8ylh0baoe8YAnQ1/L6MfugsVKI/n5YJ+5crOF9C7Oc oyMojB+pZGnxwOPiqT/Q==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ij04a-0005pA-09; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:11:00 +0000 Received: from inca-roads.misterjones.org ([213.251.177.50]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ij04X-0005oj-Bq for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:10:58 +0000 Received: from 78.163-31-62.static.virginmediabusiness.co.uk ([62.31.163.78] helo=big-swifty.misterjones.org) by cheepnis.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ij04T-0007sI-T2; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 13:10:54 +0100 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:10:52 +0000 Message-ID: <865zi8imr7.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Marc Zyngier To: Andrew Murray Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/18] perf: arm_spe: Handle guest/host exclusion flags In-Reply-To: <20191220143025.33853-16-andrew.murray@arm.com> References: <20191220143025.33853-1-andrew.murray@arm.com> <20191220143025.33853-16-andrew.murray@arm.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/26 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 62.31.163.78 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: andrew.murray@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cheepnis.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20191222_041057_549239_E41C514F X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.75 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 14:30:22 +0000, Andrew Murray wrote: > > A side effect of supporting the SPE in guests is that we prevent the > host from collecting data whilst inside a guest thus creating a black-out > window. This occurs because instead of emulating the SPE, we share it > with our guests. > > Let's accurately describe our capabilities by using the perf exclude > flags to prevent !exclude_guest and exclude_host flags from being used. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Murray > --- > drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > index 2d24af4cfcab..3703dbf459de 100644 > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > @@ -679,6 +679,9 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event *event) > if (attr->exclude_idle) > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > + if (!attr->exclude_guest || attr->exclude_host) > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + I have the opposite approach. If the host decides to profile the guest, why should that be denied? If there is a black hole, it should take place in the guest. Today, the host does expect this to work, and there is no way that we unconditionally allow it to regress. M. -- Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72172C2D0D3 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:10:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47EF2206D3 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:10:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1577016659; bh=FKzfMZXGIg0MWn2kAMDfixcbn7XSFoAYPtS1Bu8cuPo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=rmyhZlM8Jgb0JIuY1Y0HOiOG521fsZyxVnrPO2vDpW6jaM4JZJW9PUvOZnC7F+VJ7 xNgOsOIRhdIALGSozQgdHpq/0upDDDXhU0PLvuTBC5N9cm1mNWBDdctL0wtyQHWdYX 2Upn4smVCF/kyPJ/cWimr2JwwhXdesMJHEUK+3pc= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726604AbfLVMK4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Dec 2019 07:10:56 -0500 Received: from inca-roads.misterjones.org ([213.251.177.50]:36670 "EHLO inca-roads.misterjones.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726189AbfLVMK4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Dec 2019 07:10:56 -0500 Received: from 78.163-31-62.static.virginmediabusiness.co.uk ([62.31.163.78] helo=big-swifty.misterjones.org) by cheepnis.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ij04T-0007sI-T2; Sun, 22 Dec 2019 13:10:54 +0100 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2019 12:10:52 +0000 Message-ID: <865zi8imr7.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Marc Zyngier To: Andrew Murray Cc: Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/18] perf: arm_spe: Handle guest/host exclusion flags In-Reply-To: <20191220143025.33853-16-andrew.murray@arm.com> References: <20191220143025.33853-1-andrew.murray@arm.com> <20191220143025.33853-16-andrew.murray@arm.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/26 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 62.31.163.78 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: andrew.murray@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cheepnis.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 14:30:22 +0000, Andrew Murray wrote: > > A side effect of supporting the SPE in guests is that we prevent the > host from collecting data whilst inside a guest thus creating a black-out > window. This occurs because instead of emulating the SPE, we share it > with our guests. > > Let's accurately describe our capabilities by using the perf exclude > flags to prevent !exclude_guest and exclude_host flags from being used. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Murray > --- > drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > index 2d24af4cfcab..3703dbf459de 100644 > --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c > @@ -679,6 +679,9 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_event_init(struct perf_event *event) > if (attr->exclude_idle) > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > + if (!attr->exclude_guest || attr->exclude_host) > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + I have the opposite approach. If the host decides to profile the guest, why should that be denied? If there is a black hole, it should take place in the guest. Today, the host does expect this to work, and there is no way that we unconditionally allow it to regress. M. -- Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny.