From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: KVM PMU virtualization Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 16:08:05 +0100 Message-ID: <1267196885.22519.643.camel@laptop> References: <4B86917C.4070102@redhat.com> <20100225173423.GB4246@8bytes.org> <20100226084241.GF15885@elte.hu> <4B87987A.2020302@redhat.com> <20100226104437.GB7463@elte.hu> <4B87AF44.9090702@redhat.com> <20100226114217.GI7463@elte.hu> <4B87B5DE.30503@redhat.com> <20100226120750.GA11578@elte.hu> <4B87BC74.7050207@redhat.com> <20100226133149.GA23422@elte.hu> <4B87CE93.1070906@redhat.com> <4B87D2EA.1090503@redhat.com> <1267194420.22519.605.camel@laptop> <4B87E09C.3080209@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jes Sorensen , Ingo Molnar , Joerg Roedel , KVM General , Zachary Amsden , Gleb Natapov , ming.m.lin@intel.com, "Zhang, Yanmin" , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Arjan van de Ven , Fr??d??ric Weisbecker , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:38218 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964936Ab0BZPI3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:08:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B87E09C.3080209@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 16:54 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 02/26/2010 04:27 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 15:55 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > >> That actually works on the Intel-only architectural pmu. I'm beginning > >> to like it more and more. > >> > > Only for the arch defined events, all _7_ of them. > > > > That's 7 more than what we support now, and 7 more than what we can > guarantee without it. Again, what windows software uses only those 7? Does it pay to only have access to those 7 or does it limit the usability to exactly the same subset a paravirt interface would?