From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tx2outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (tx2ehsobe001.messaging.microsoft.com [65.55.88.11]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "MSIT Machine Auth CA 2" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED1502C00A1 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 03:16:13 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 12:16:02 -0500 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Emulate MCSRR0/1 SPR and rfmci instruction To: Alexander Graf References: <1372858255-19708-1-git-send-email-mihai.caraman@freescale.com> <1372858255-19708-2-git-send-email-mihai.caraman@freescale.com> <1C2B7183-EF0F-4D97-9287-1068C9E97471@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <1C2B7183-EF0F-4D97-9287-1068C9E97471@suse.de> (from agraf@suse.de on Mon Jul 8 13:45:58 2013) Message-ID: <1373390162.8183.195@snotra> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; delsp=Yes; format=Flowed Cc: Mihai Caraman , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 07/08/2013 01:45:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >=20 > On 03.07.2013, at 15:30, Mihai Caraman wrote: >=20 > > Some guests are making use of return from machine check instruction > > to do crazy things even though the 64-bit kernel doesn't handle yet > > this interrupt. Emulate MCSRR0/1 SPR and rfmci instruction =20 > accordingly. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman > > --- > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 + > > arch/powerpc/kvm/booke_emulate.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > arch/powerpc/kvm/timing.c | 1 + > > 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h =20 > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > index af326cd..0466789 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > @@ -148,6 +148,7 @@ enum kvm_exit_types { > > EMULATED_TLBWE_EXITS, > > EMULATED_RFI_EXITS, > > EMULATED_RFCI_EXITS, > > + EMULATED_RFMCI_EXITS, >=20 > I would quite frankly prefer to see us abandon the whole exit timing =20 > framework in the kernel and instead use trace points. Then we don't =20 > have to maintain all of this randomly exercised code. Would this map well to tracepoints? We're not trying to track discrete =20 events, so much as accumulated time spent in different areas. -Scott=