From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] KVM: Expose the architectural performance monitoring
 CPUID leaf
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 13:25:09 +0200
Message-ID: <20111101112509.GU17571@redhat.com>
References: <1319993624-20247-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com>
 <1319993624-20247-8-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com>
 <4EAFCF49.2070508@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, mingo@elte.hu,
	a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, acme@ghostprotocols.net
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54945 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753942Ab1KAMEv (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:04:51 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4EAFCF49.2070508@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:51:53PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 06:53 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
> >
> > Provide a CPUID leaf that describes the emulated PMU.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |   23 ++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > index 5ea4cb8..56153a9 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > @@ -2543,6 +2543,28 @@ static void do_cpuid_ent(struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *entry, u32 function,
> >  	}
> >  	case 9:
> >  		break;
> > +	case 0xa: { /* Architectural Performance Monitoring */
> > +		struct x86_pmu_capability cap;
> > +
> > +		perf_get_x86_pmu_capability(&cap);
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Only support guest architectural pmu on a host
> > +		 * with architectural pmu.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (!cap.version)
> > +			memset(&cap, 0, sizeof(cap));
> > +
> > +		entry->eax = min(cap.version, 2)
> > +			| (cap.num_counters_gp << 8)
> > +			| (cap.bit_width_gp << 16)
> > +			| (cap.events_mask_len << 24);
> 
> What if num_counters_gp is larger than our array?
> 
I am using perf defines for array sizes (X86_PMC_MAX_(GENERIC|FIXED)) and perf takes
care of checking num_counters_(gp|fixed) boundaries for us.

> > +		entry->ebx = cap.events_mask;
> > +		entry->ecx = 0;
> > +		entry->edx = cap.num_counters_fixed
> > +			| (cap.bit_width_fixed << 5);
> 
> Ditto.
> 

--
			Gleb.