From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-32.mta1.migadu.com (out-32.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.32]) (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 9399C3D99 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2023 12:42:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 12:41:53 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1686746518; h=from:from: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=vVgohHr+8y/naKxQ8awxRJilZdLTVuzyEw7fAcdG64A=; b=vXtoWCWGoWUj4X5qVEdoEmWU3Lyx+lZaNsCO4a9ZC729SBpKTdzHAGvXWIq1eE6BaF+f5C I3pxRCZKlinyC6IeKMy0sqHImLvoZTu17N/DA0fxQBR4wOWyX1CWIFKgz0mI3m8GDtNr7l D7Q2U/q5bDPVLB5U2ddsJl1pTPLiTaI= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Oliver Upton To: Reiji Watanabe Cc: Marc Zyngier , kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, James Morse , Alexandru Elisei , Zenghui Yu , Suzuki K Poulose , Jing Zhang , Raghavendra Rao Anata Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] KVM: arm64: PMU: Avoid inappropriate use of host's PMUVer Message-ID: References: <20230610194510.4146549-1-reijiw@google.com> <20230611045430.evkcp4py4yuw5qgr@google.com> <20230611160105.orvjohigsaevkcrf@google.com> <20230613002633.gdttlmn5bnkr4l5i@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230613002633.gdttlmn5bnkr4l5i@google.com> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 05:26:33PM -0700, Reiji Watanabe wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 09:36:38PM +0200, Oliver Upton wrote: > > I'd rather we start exposing the feature when we provide all the > > necessary detail. > > To confirm, are you suggesting to stop exposing the event even on hosts > w/o PMMIR_EL1 until KVM gets ready to support PMMIR_EL1 ? > (guests on those hosts won't get PMMIR_EL1 in any case though?) > Could you please explain why ? > > Perhaps I think I would rather keep the code as it is? > (since I'm simply not sure what would be the benefits of that) I'd rather not keep confusing code hanging around. The fact that KVM does not support the STALL_SLOTS event is invariant of both the hardware PMU implementation and the userspace value for the ID register field. Let's make sure the implementation exactly matches this position. -- Thanks, Oliver