From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosry@kernel.org>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/13] KVM: x86/pmu: Disable counters based on Host-Only/Guest-Only bits in SVM
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 12:58:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <afpL7QTODL5JbJsN@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <afpAw3UkbVMbXptv@google.com>
On Tue, May 05, 2026, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > > Did you see my other replies and code snippet tracking disabling
> > > reasons? I think the code snippet would still work, I just need to
> > > move the pmc_is_nested_disabled() check into pmc_is_locally_enabled().
> >
> > I did. IMO, all of what you proposed is an optimization to avoid the "costly"
> > checks at the time of pmc_is_locally_enabled(). In quotes because I don't think
> > the _overall_ cost is actually all that high. pmc_is_locally_enabled() is only
> > called in relatively slow paths, and my guess is the CALL+RET (or untrained RET,
> > ugh) is probably more expensive than the logic itself.
> >
> > The very nice side effect of incorporating the logic into pmc_is_locally_enabled()
> > is that I _think_ we can drop kvm_pmu_ops.reprogram_counters(), because
> > amd_mediated_pmu_handle_host_guest_bits() will instead be:
> >
> > static bool amd_pmc_is_locally_disabled(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
> > {
> > struct kvm_pmu *pmu = pmc_to_pmu(pmc);
> > struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = pmu_to_vcpu(pmu);
> > u64 host_guest_bits;
> >
> > /* Common code is supposed to check the common enable bit. */
> > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!(pmc->eventsel & ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE)))
> > return false;
> >
> > /*
> > * If both bits are cleared, always keep the counter enabled. Otherwise,
> > * counter enablement needs to be re-evaluated on every nested
> > * transition (and EFER.SVME change).
> > */
> > host_guest_bits = pmc->eventsel & AMD64_EVENTSEL_HOST_GUEST_MASK;
> > if (!host_guest_bits)
> > return true;
> >
> > /* If either bit is set and EFER.SVME=0, the counter is disabled. */
> > if (!(vcpu->arch.efer & EFER_SVME))
> > return false;
> >
> > if (host_guest_bits == AMD64_EVENTSEL_HOST_GUEST_MASK)
> > return true;
> >
> > return !!(host_guest_bits & AMD64_EVENTSEL_GUESTONLY) == is_guest_mode(vcpu);
> > }
>
> If we do this and drop kvm_pmu_ops.reprogram_counters(), we still need
> somewhere to actually clear ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE in eventsel_hw.
Yep. I was thinking we'd do that as part of reprogram_counter().
> What if we call kvm_pmu_ops.pmc_is_locally_disabled() at the top of
> reprogram_counter(), cache the result, and use that for eventsel_hw
> modification and in pmc_is_locally_enabled()?
Why bother caching it? I suspect it will make the code harder to read, I would
generally prefer pmc_is_locally_enabled() be self-sufficient, and I don't think
the caching will elide any lookups. Legacy PMU doesn't care, and even if it did,
it should only query pmc_is_locally_enabled() once. And the mediated PMU should
only query it once.
> We'd also probably want to rename it. I would honeslty just use 'nested'
> instead of 'locally_disabled' and 'mode_specific_enables' as that's the
> only current user.
But it's not strictly nested specific. E.g. even the vCPU doesn't support nested
virtualization, a (stupid) guest can still set HOST_ONLY and effectively disable
the counter, thanks to the bizarro behavior of HOST_ONLY when EFER.SVME=0.
> Something like this with your proposed amd_pmc_is_locally_disabled()
> above, which is similar to the kvm_pmu_ops.mediated_reprogram_counter()
> implementation in v4 except that the vendor-specific callback is more
> targeted:
>
> static void pmc_check_nested_disabled(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
> {
> if (!(pmc->eventsel & ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE))
> return;
>
> if (!test_bit(pmc->idx, &pmu->pmc_has_nested_enables))
> return;
>
> pmc->is_nested_disabled = kvm_pmu_call(pmc_is_nested_disabled)(pmc);
> if (!pmc->is_nested_disabled)
> pmc->eventsel_hw &= ~ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
I don't want multiple paths mucking with eventsel_hw's ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE.
That's how we end up with ordering bugs. E.g. pmc_check_nested_disabled() *must*
be called after kvm_mediated_pmu_refresh_event_filter(), which is gross and brittle.
E.g. something like so. We can even optimize away the PMU filter lookup (which
I suspect would be more expensive in the common case?) if the counter is disabled
thanks to H/G bits.
diff --git arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
index 7b2b4ce6bdad..4ca4a0078d35 100644
--- arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
+++ arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
@@ -530,21 +530,24 @@ static bool pmc_is_event_allowed(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
return is_fixed_event_allowed(filter, pmc->idx);
}
-static void kvm_mediated_pmu_refresh_event_filter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
+static void kvm_mediated_pmu_refresh_eventsel_hw(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
{
- bool allowed = pmc_is_event_allowed(pmc);
struct kvm_pmu *pmu = pmc_to_pmu(pmc);
if (pmc_is_gp(pmc)) {
pmc->eventsel_hw &= ~ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
- if (allowed)
+ if (!test_bit(pmc->idx, &pmu->pmc_has_mode_specific_enables) &&
+ kvm_pmu_call(pmc_is_locally_disabled(pmc)))
+ return;
+
+ if (pmc_is_event_allowed(pmc))
pmc->eventsel_hw |= pmc->eventsel &
ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
} else {
u64 mask = intel_fixed_bits_by_idx(pmc->idx - KVM_FIXED_PMC_BASE_IDX, 0xf);
pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl_hw &= ~mask;
- if (allowed)
+ if (pmc_is_event_allowed(pmc))
pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl_hw |= pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl & mask;
}
}
Actually, this code is being silly. It unnecessarily performs the PMU filter
lookup when the _guest_ disables the counters via eventsel. If you first "fix"
that by querying pmc_is_locally_enabled() before checking the event filter, then
you won't even need to touch that code when introducing H/G bits, because it will
Just Work thanks to pmc_is_locally_enabled() doing the right thing (as it should,
becase as mentioned early, that logic is architectural).
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
index 7b2b4ce6bdad..c84f2f971ab1 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
@@ -530,22 +530,23 @@ static bool pmc_is_event_allowed(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
return is_fixed_event_allowed(filter, pmc->idx);
}
-static void kvm_mediated_pmu_refresh_event_filter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
+static void kvm_mediated_pmu_refresh_eventsel_hw(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
{
- bool allowed = pmc_is_event_allowed(pmc);
+ bool allowed = pmc_is_locally_enabled(pmc) && pmc_is_event_allowed(pmc);
struct kvm_pmu *pmu = pmc_to_pmu(pmc);
if (pmc_is_gp(pmc)) {
- pmc->eventsel_hw &= ~ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
if (allowed)
- pmc->eventsel_hw |= pmc->eventsel &
- ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
+ pmc->eventsel_hw |= ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
+ else
+ pmc->eventsel_hw &= ~ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
} else {
u64 mask = intel_fixed_bits_by_idx(pmc->idx - KVM_FIXED_PMC_BASE_IDX, 0xf);
- pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl_hw &= ~mask;
if (allowed)
- pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl_hw |= pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl & mask;
+ pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl_hw |= mask;
+ else
+ pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl_hw &= ~mask;
}
}
@@ -558,7 +559,7 @@ static int reprogram_counter(struct kvm_pmc *pmc)
u8 fixed_ctr_ctrl;
if (kvm_vcpu_has_mediated_pmu(pmu_to_vcpu(pmu))) {
- kvm_mediated_pmu_refresh_event_filter(pmc);
+ kvm_mediated_pmu_refresh_eventsel_hw(pmc);
return 0;
}
> Also, would you rather I send a new version with everything, or do you
> want to pick up some of the patches in this version independently?
Uh, probably just send a new version. I doubt I'll get through the first few
patches before you're ready to send the next version.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-05 19:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-30 20:27 [PATCH v5 00/13] KVM: x86/pmu: Add support for AMD Host-Only/Guest-Only bits Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 01/13] KVM: nSVM: Stop leaking single-stepping on VMRUN into L2 Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 02/13] KVM: nSVM: Bail early out of VMRUN emulation if advancing RIP fails Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 03/13] KVM: nSVM: Move VMRUN instruction retirement after entering guest mode Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 04/13] KVM: x86: Move enable_pmu/enable_mediated_pmu to pmu.h and pmu.c Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 05/13] KVM: x86/pmu: Rename reprogram_counters() to clarify usage Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 06/13] KVM: x86/pmu: Do a single atomic OR when reprogramming counters Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 07/13] KVM: x86/pmu: Disable counters based on Host-Only/Guest-Only bits in SVM Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 23:24 ` Yosry Ahmed
2026-05-01 3:34 ` Yosry Ahmed
2026-05-01 17:50 ` Yosry Ahmed
2026-05-05 18:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-05-05 18:23 ` Yosry Ahmed
2026-05-05 18:49 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-05-05 19:32 ` Yosry Ahmed
2026-05-05 19:58 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2026-05-05 20:24 ` Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 08/13] KVM: x86/pmu: Reprogram Host/Guest-Only counters on nested transitions Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 09/13] KVM: x86/pmu: Allow Host-Only/Guest-Only bits with nSVM and mediated PMU Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 10/13] KVM: selftests: Refactor allocating guest stack into a helper Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 11/13] KVM: selftests: Allocate a dedicated guest page for x86 L2 guest stack Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 12/13] KVM: selftests: Drop L1-provided stacks for L2 guests on x86 Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:27 ` [PATCH v5 13/13] KVM: selftests: Add svm_pmu_host_guest_test for Host-Only/Guest-Only bits Yosry Ahmed
2026-04-30 20:38 ` [PATCH v5 00/13] KVM: x86/pmu: Add support for AMD " Yosry Ahmed
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=afpL7QTODL5JbJsN@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=yosry@kernel.org \
/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