From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86/intr: Explicitly check NMI from guest to eliminate false positives
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 13:08:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZcKf3RvyoVJ77sUQ@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZcKKwSi7FdbSnexE@google.com>
On Tue, Feb 06, 2024, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> +Oliver
>
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2023, Like Xu wrote:
> > Note that when vm-exit is indeed triggered by PMI and before HANDLING_NMI
> > is cleared, it's also still possible that another PMI is generated on host.
> > Also for perf/core timer mode, the false positives are still possible since
> > that non-NMI sources of interrupts are not always being used by perf/core.
> > In both cases above, perf/core should correctly distinguish between real
> > RIP sources or even need to generate two samples, belonging to host and
> > guest separately, but that's perf/core's story for interested warriors.
>
> Oliver has a patch[*] that he promised he would send "soon" (wink wink) to
> properly fix events that are configured to exclude the guest. Unless someone
> objects, I'm going to tweak the last part of the changelog to be:
>
> Note that when VM-exit is indeed triggered by PMI and before HANDLING_NMI
> is cleared, it's also still possible that another PMI is generated on host.
> Also for perf/core timer mode, the false positives are still possible since
> that non-NMI sources of interrupts are not always being used by perf/core.
>
> For events that are host-only, perf/core can and should eliminate false
> positives by checking event->attr.exclude_guest, i.e. events that are
> configured to exclude KVM guests should never fire in the guest.
>
> Events that are configured to count host and guest are trickier, perhaps
> impossible to handle with 100% accuracy? And regardless of what accuracy
> is provided by perf/core, improving KVM's accuracy is cheap and easy, with
> no real downsides.
Never mind, this causes KUT's pmu_pebs test to fail:
FAIL: Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x1): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x2): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x4): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x1f000008): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: GP counter 0 (0xfffffffffffe): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x1): GP counter 0 (0xfffffffffffe): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x1): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x2): GP counter 0 (0xfffffffffffe): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x2): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x4): GP counter 0 (0xfffffffffffe): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x4): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x1f000008): GP counter 0 (0xfffffffffffe): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x1f000008): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x1): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x2): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x4): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
FAIL: Adaptive (0x1f000008): Multiple (0x700000055): No OVF irq, none PEBS records.
It might be a test bug, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to
investigate.
Like,
If you want any chance of your patches going anywhere but my trash folder, you
need to change your upstream workflow to actually run tests. I would give most
people the benefit of the doubt, e.g. assume they didn't have the requisite
hardware, or didn't realize which tests would be relevant/important. But this
is a recurring problem, and you have been warned, multiple times.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-06 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-06 3:20 [PATCH v2] KVM: x86/intr: Explicitly check NMI from guest to eliminate false positives Like Xu
2023-12-06 15:30 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-12-07 2:12 ` Like Xu
2023-12-07 16:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-12-07 15:32 ` Maxim Levitsky
2023-12-13 7:28 ` Dongli Zhang
2023-12-13 8:24 ` Like Xu
2023-12-13 17:01 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-06 19:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-06 21:08 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-02-18 9:51 ` Like Xu
2024-02-27 0:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-02-27 2:21 ` Sean Christopherson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZcKf3RvyoVJ77sUQ@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=like.xu.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox