From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Performance monitoring units and KVM Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:05:43 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87wsprxmyb.fsf@pike.pond.sub.org> <47A0B6DF.40208@qumranet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, Markus.Armbruster-5C7GfCeVMHo@public.gmane.org To: avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <47A0B6DF.40208-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> (Avi Kivity's message of "Wed\, 30 Jan 2008 19\:41\:51 +0200") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org > Is there really a requirement to profile several userspace programs, on > several guests, simultaneously? Since guests affect each others performance (e.g. one guest can push the data of another guest out of cache) profiling over guests makes a lot of sense. Otherwise you cannot easily diagnose any situations where a guest affects another guests' performance negatively. >The usual argument for profiling over gus If not, passing through the PMU will > work best, with the additional advantage that guests will not need > modification (so you can run Windows with VTune, for example). Ideally you would support both. -Andi ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/