From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.21]) (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 B930020C325; Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:33:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730925220; cv=none; b=e5hcLnl0UZMh61xCw0Tvs8lFSghXq6pyElXvWbfDlHZR1nl5/tTp6/NRJODUIJtLX5L9OsEhDfZVyyOKsYSQ1RJCXheo/P3hL0oPkoLHqtze11DPCini4xIrmutTzulvetp/Zsy+HxkHdj/BPVROPhlBbu3wu3bqr8kwWuDSlIg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730925220; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zoRLMKW55o98JRmgTawjT4yCHMdI37JhvZnILfOLqRQ=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=OWGWHzXjBTuDUnv+nx9OPgC+yT5XoPeVxOwNhPA6OXf1x1qUIXwvYG5sRmsOfmvID6GOvAgkUu5KEQ+3ctxmurfj6zN89Y5CWp2BQH7r7zgjZZItETSAzD34L4P+28Vlc/wUx6jCR3/vyEWSk8FZ4axW3kKuroI/nF96L+q4tY4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=Ytyxj6G6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="Ytyxj6G6" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1730925219; x=1762461219; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zoRLMKW55o98JRmgTawjT4yCHMdI37JhvZnILfOLqRQ=; b=Ytyxj6G6SsI495CioUmNHx7cRlyBFYFfPMdrwqQTs7kVLR52LzQ5yXFl 2exwwxeL7MhRBiV/6Rdm8RKO8DWaoyZRS+h3hOj0sKs07xGziQVw4EMsc Fbvk7CnMHzRGVnAZbkkW8h/HOS1jYeIxr0v4Jyb7O0R1eOtx8z+rqYb9c xhwxObhbata6+Q/OVHoVBhsvu5GxP5DSov99i2y+dhTMa5C7+OxtpF1yQ pdLvtICoi/rKfvGMkXiX4O4vHa5yd0AaYEBH0R4CKPPpaM9ONm/ODdTPC YP0kPzwBPMtxRSL5zdQYOz5VNqCIGITEymcDudpW6o/0nQLNhBw0y6I8A A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: K0x+SE5ZQ+iFnKBipbx8tw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: +nIijFSoRrmus9YYZpF2vg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11222"; a="30705990" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,199,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="30705990" Received: from fmviesa007.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.147]) by orvoesa113.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Nov 2024 12:33:37 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: V8XizmLPQ5C6WPxTiJI6TA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: oNVXimYpTpmteoMQVxNatg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,263,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="84355097" Received: from linux.intel.com ([10.54.29.200]) by fmviesa007.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Nov 2024 12:33:37 -0800 Received: from [10.212.82.230] (kliang2-mobl1.ccr.corp.intel.com [10.212.82.230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by linux.intel.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 560D920B5703; Wed, 6 Nov 2024 12:33:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <597dbcf6-8169-4084-881c-8942ed363189@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 15:33:30 -0500 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/5] x86: perf: Refactor misc flag assignments To: Oliver Upton Cc: Colton Lewis , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Namhyung Kim , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Ian Rogers , Adrian Hunter , Will Deacon , Russell King , Catalin Marinas , Michael Ellerman , Nicholas Piggin , Christophe Leroy , Naveen N Rao , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Alexander Gordeev , Christian Borntraeger , Sven Schnelle , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org References: <20241105195603.2317483-1-coltonlewis@google.com> <20241105195603.2317483-5-coltonlewis@google.com> <65675ed8-e569-47f8-b1eb-40c853751bfb@linux.intel.com> Content-Language: en-US From: "Liang, Kan" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2024-11-06 3:02 p.m., Oliver Upton wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2024 at 11:03:10AM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote: >>> +static unsigned long common_misc_flags(struct pt_regs *regs) >>> +{ >>> + if (regs->flags & PERF_EFLAGS_EXACT) >>> + return PERF_RECORD_MISC_EXACT_IP; >>> + >>> + return 0; >>> +} >>> + >>> +unsigned long perf_arch_guest_misc_flags(struct pt_regs *regs) >>> +{ >>> + unsigned long guest_state = perf_guest_state(); >>> + unsigned long flags = common_misc_flags(regs); >>> + >>> + if (guest_state & PERF_GUEST_USER) >>> + flags |= PERF_RECORD_MISC_GUEST_USER; >>> + else if (guest_state & PERF_GUEST_ACTIVE) >>> + flags |= PERF_RECORD_MISC_GUEST_KERNEL; >>> + >> >> The logic of setting the GUEST_KERNEL flag is implicitly changed here. >> >> For the current code, the GUEST_KERNEL flag is set for !PERF_GUEST_USER, >> which include both guest_in_kernel and guest_in_NMI. > > Where is the "guest_in_NMI" state coming from? KVM only reports user v. > kernel mode. I may understand the kvm_arch_pmi_in_guest() wrong. However, the kvm_guest_state() at least return 3 states. 0 PERF_GUEST_ACTIVE PERF_GUEST_ACTIVE | PERF_GUEST_USER The existing code indeed assumes two modes. If it's not user mode, it must be kernel mode. However, the proposed code behave differently, or at least implies there are more modes. If it's not user mode and sets PERF_GUEST_ACTIVE, it's kernel mode. Thanks, Kan