public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	pbonzini@redhat.com, ak@linux.intel.com, kan.liang@intel.com,
	mingo@redhat.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com, like.xu@intel.com,
	jannh@google.com, arei.gonglei@huawei.com, jmattson@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 12/12] KVM/VMX/vPMU: support to report GLOBAL_STATUS_LBRS_FROZEN
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 17:23:40 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5D25AE9C.8090404@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190709113549.GU3402@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On 07/09/2019 07:35 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> Yeah; although I'm not sure if its an implementation or specification
> problem. But as it exists it is of very limited use.
>
> Fundamentally our events (with exception of event groups) are
> independent. Events should always count, except when the PMI is running
> -- so as to not include the measurement overhead in the measurement
> itself. But this (mis)feature stops the entire PMU as soon as a single
> counter overflows, inhibiting all other counters from running (as they
> should) until the PMI has happened and reset the state.
>
> (Note that, strictly speaking, we even expect the overflowing counter to
> continue counting until the PMI happens. Having an overflow should not
> mean we loose events. A sampling and !sampling event should produce the
> same event count.)
>
> So even when there's only a single event (group) scheduled, it isn't
> strictly right. And when there's multiple events scheduled it is
> definitely wrong.
>
> And while I understand the purpose of the current semantics; it makes a
> single event group sample count more coherent, the fact that is looses
> events just bugs me something fierce -- and as shown, it breaks tools.

Thanks for sharing the finding.
If I understand this correctly, you observed that counter getting freezed
earlier than expected (expected to freeze at the time PMI gets generated).

Have you talked to anyone for possible freeze adjustment from the hardware?

Best,
Wei


      reply	other threads:[~2019-07-10  9:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-08  1:23 [PATCH v7 00/12] Guest LBR Enabling Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 01/12] perf/x86: fix the variable type of the LBR MSRs Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 02/12] perf/x86: add a function to get the lbr stack Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 03/12] KVM/x86: KVM_CAP_X86_GUEST_LBR Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 04/12] KVM/x86: intel_pmu_lbr_enable Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 05/12] KVM/x86/vPMU: tweak kvm_pmu_get_msr Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 06/12] KVM/x86: expose MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES to the guest Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 07/12] perf/x86: no counter allocation support Wei Wang
2019-07-08 14:29   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-09  2:58     ` Wei Wang
2019-07-09  9:43       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-09 11:36         ` Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 08/12] KVM/x86/vPMU: Add APIs to support host save/restore the guest lbr stack Wei Wang
2019-07-08 14:48   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-09  3:04     ` Wei Wang
2019-07-09  9:39       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-09 11:34         ` Wei Wang
2019-07-09 12:19           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-10  8:19             ` Wei Wang
2019-07-09 11:45   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-10  8:21     ` Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 09/12] perf/x86: save/restore LBR_SELECT on vCPU switching Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 10/12] KVM/x86/lbr: lazy save the guest lbr stack Wei Wang
2019-07-08 14:53   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-08 15:11     ` Andi Kleen
2019-07-09 11:39       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-09  3:14     ` Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 11/12] KVM/x86: remove the common handling of the debugctl msr Wei Wang
2019-07-08  1:23 ` [PATCH v7 12/12] KVM/VMX/vPMU: support to report GLOBAL_STATUS_LBRS_FROZEN Wei Wang
2019-07-08 15:09   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-09  3:24     ` Wei Wang
2019-07-09 11:35       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-07-10  9:23         ` Wei Wang [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5D25AE9C.8090404@intel.com \
    --to=wei.w.wang@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=arei.gonglei@huawei.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jmattson@google.com \
    --cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=like.xu@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox