From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF5C7651BE for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:30:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710862242; cv=none; b=ifT+qmswepQeD8xkFQWgQ/pVXssbb5/IrI0rDQ2XLsKerxCtRF97foWon3BpdiTafuQtDQZ6zGY6hyqzbE3YO3uTUaVMzQqaY7IAd7BFumIRZ9/YuT6sj4gmB1EFFyMEUVgLppfFICWAuVbD9EUusH9Tw1qoftpv7ksgDwXmDmo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710862242; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9/QpWaWBH0RcwX9cpGd6kDPy30VAQIzVGPz2eDbW5fk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=LkcLQJpWfAhGICtMlXvJxXjJ8a1c+4wSDDEx5F13ZuA3ugyIPG5gkxcJOlmj44xT4y57pC53BtyxT54TG57m9dI+em6t+/SeWdd5HoylwRj7tvkg5fvIZy/BRnCUpd4rGFreAfR5OB/wpnSo82VwZVpQfFe7M5DW3NDiSS/YDLY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=Ll1FXJxR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Ll1FXJxR" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1710862239; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=37GFYLI5MyQqq4540bATPhxNX5uMFiPaTnTj87Z/d5c=; b=Ll1FXJxRCbGjZwWw4xKatWhZSZGN6qU1zBpAq1uV5AAOLWYoU2K1dBPodxcEeqOEiRp9q3 gAtNfqz8/RRnEH64g4tt901hQt/jyziIo9Y+voCWXGRbZ0eOLKbyycK6ZAYxDLbmzyaKFD 00FFW/zHtQcHhV1dJrDRxdQeKFVHYak= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-629-kU30rjpWMg214CtLgs35JA-1; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 11:30:35 -0400 X-MC-Unique: kU30rjpWMg214CtLgs35JA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 583D2101CC6F; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:30:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.42.28.88]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE9B740C6DAD; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:30:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:30:09 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Peter Maydell Cc: Eric Auger , Shaoqin Huang , qemu-arm@nongnu.org, Sebastian Ott , Paolo Bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] arm/kvm: Enable support for KVM_ARM_VCPU_PMU_V3_FILTER Message-ID: Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= References: <20240221063431.76992-1-shahuang@redhat.com> <0f8380d9-bdca-47b2-93d9-ee8f6382e7f1@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.2 On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 03:00:40PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 14:57, Eric Auger wrote: > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > On 2/29/24 12:00, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > > > > It doesn't appear because the list of properties that we advertise > > > via query-cpu-model-expansion is set in the cpu_model_advertised_features[] > > > array in target/arm/arm-qmp-cmds.c, and this patch doesn't add > > > 'kvm-pmu-filter' to it. But you have a good point about all the > > > others being bool properties: I don't know enough about that > > > mechanism to know if simply adding this to the list is right. > > > > > > This does raise a more general question: do we need to advertise > > > the existence of this property to libvirt via QMP? Eric, Sebastian: > > > do you know ? > > sorry I missed this question. yes I think it is sensible to expose that > > option to libvirt. There is no good default value to be set at qemu > > level so to me it really depends on the upper stack to choose the > > correct value (depending on the sensitiveness of the data that justified > > the kernel uapi). > > In that case we should definitely have a mechanism for libvirt > to be able to say "does this QEMU (and this CPU) implement > this property?". Unfortunately my QMP/libvirt expertise is > too low to be able to suggest what that mechanism should be... Libvirt uses 'qom-list' on '/machine/unattached/device[0]' to identify CPU properties. If 'kvm-pmu-filter' appears with that, then detection will be fine. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|