From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] KVM in-guest performance monitoring Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:38:44 +0200 Message-ID: <1309336724.6701.884.camel@twins> References: <1307972106-2468-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <4E0AD9A6.9080108@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:38039 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753918Ab1F2IkF convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2011 04:40:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4E0AD9A6.9080108@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 10:52 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 06/13/2011 04:34 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > > This patchset exposes an emulated version 1 architectural performance > > monitoring unit to KVM guests. The PMU is emulated using perf_events, > > so the host kernel can multiplex host-wide, host-user, and the > > guest on available resources. > > > > 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 > > - some combinations of INV and CMASK are not supported > > - counters keep on counting in the host as well as the guest > > > > perf maintainers: please consider the first three patches for merging (the > > first two make sense even without the rest). If you're familiar with the Intel > > PMU, please review patch 5 as well - it effectively undoes all your work > > of abstracting the PMU into perf_events by unabstracting perf_events into what > > is hoped is a very similar PMU. > > > > v2: > > - don't pass perf_event handler context to the callback; extract it via the > > 'event' parameter instead > > - RDPMC emulation and interception > > - CR4.PCE emulation > > Peter, can you look at 1-3 please? Queued them, thanks! I was more or less waiting for a next iteration of the series because of those problems reported, but those three stand well on their own.