From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756338Ab1JDLKq (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Oct 2011 07:10:46 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55621 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752070Ab1JDLKp (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Oct 2011 07:10:45 -0400 Message-ID: <4E8AE9A0.2060706@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 13:10:24 +0200 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110906 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gleb Natapov CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, joerg.roedel@amd.com, mingo@elte.hu, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] KVM, VMX: Add support for guest/host-only profiling References: <1317649795-18259-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1317649795-18259-9-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <4E89CE09.1080808@redhat.com> <20111003153619.GA3225@redhat.com> <4E8AD1D3.9040402@redhat.com> <20111004095654.GE30105@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20111004095654.GE30105@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/04/2011 11:56 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 11:28:51AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 10/03/2011 05:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > >On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 05:00:25PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > >> On 10/03/2011 03:49 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > >> >Support guest/host-only profiling by switch perf msrs on > > >> >a guest entry if needed. > > >> > > > >> >@@ -6052,6 +6056,26 @@ static void vmx_cancel_injection(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > >> > vmcs_write32(VM_ENTRY_INTR_INFO_FIELD, 0); > > >> > } > > >> > > > >> >+static void atomic_switch_perf_msrs(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx) > > >> >+{ > > >> >+#ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS > > >> > > >> No need for #ifdef (if you also define perf_guest_get_msrs() when > > >> !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS). > > >> > > >Yes, but will compiler be smart enough to remove the code of the > > >function completely? It will have to figure that vmx->perf_msrs_cnt is > > >always 0 somehow. > > > > It won't, but do we care? > > > Dead code, that likely to be inlined, on a hot path. I mean, CONFIG_KVM && !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS is an unlikely combination. If you're using kvm, you usually want PERF_EVENTS. > > >VMWRITE happens only when number of autoloaded MSRs changes (which is > > >rare), not on each call to add_atomic_switch_msr(). I thought about > > >optimizing this write too by doing > > >vmcs_write32(VM_(ENTRY|EXIT)_MSR_LOAD_COUNT, m->nr) only once by > > >checking that m->nr changed during vmentry. Can be done later. > > > > For EFER and PERF_CTRL, it's done unconditionally, no? > For those yes. We do not cache their value currently. Can be added, but > this is independent optimization. Sure. I note that on most cpus only these will ever be used. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function