From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] KVM: selftests: x86: Add svm_pmu_hg_test for HG_ONLY bits
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 09:12:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aXJal3srw2-3J5Dm@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260121225438.3908422-7-jmattson@google.com>
On Wed, Jan 21, 2026, Jim Mattson wrote:
> Add a selftest to verify KVM correctly virtualizes the AMD PMU Host-Only
> (bit 41) and Guest-Only (bit 40) event selector bits across all relevant
> SVM state transitions.
>
> For both Guest-Only and Host-Only counters, verify that:
> 1. SVME=0: counter counts (HG_ONLY bits ignored)
> 2. Set SVME=1: counter behavior changes based on HG_ONLY bit
> 3. VMRUN to L2: counter behavior switches (guest vs host mode)
> 4. VMEXIT to L1: counter behavior switches back
> 5. Clear SVME=0: counter counts (HG_ONLY bits ignored again)
>
> Also confirm that setting both bits is the same as setting neither bit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile.kvm | 1 +
> .../selftests/kvm/x86/svm_pmu_hg_test.c | 297 ++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 298 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/svm_pmu_hg_test.c
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile.kvm b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile.kvm
> index e88699e227dd..06ba85d97618 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile.kvm
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile.kvm
> @@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86 += x86/svm_vmcall_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86 += x86/svm_int_ctl_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86 += x86/svm_nested_shutdown_test
> TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86 += x86/svm_nested_soft_inject_test
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86 += x86/svm_pmu_hg_test
Maybe svm_nested_pmu_test? Hmm, that makes it sound like "nested PMU" though.
svm_pmu_host_guest_test?
> +#define MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0 0xc0010200
> +#define MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR0 0xc0010201
> +
> +#define AMD64_EVENTSEL_GUESTONLY BIT_ULL(40)
> +#define AMD64_EVENTSEL_HOSTONLY BIT_ULL(41)
Please put architectural definitions in pmu.h (or whatever library header we
have).
> +struct hg_test_data {
Please drop "hg" (I keep reading it as "mercury").
> + uint64_t l2_delta;
> + bool l2_done;
> +};
> +
> +static struct hg_test_data *hg_data;
> +
> +static void l2_guest_code(void)
> +{
> + hg_data->l2_delta = run_and_measure();
> + hg_data->l2_done = true;
> + vmmcall();
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Test Guest-Only counter across all relevant state transitions.
> + */
> +static void l1_guest_code_guestonly(struct svm_test_data *svm,
> + struct hg_test_data *data)
> +{
> + unsigned long l2_guest_stack[L2_GUEST_STACK_SIZE];
> + struct vmcb *vmcb = svm->vmcb;
> + uint64_t eventsel, delta;
> +
> + hg_data = data;
> +
> + eventsel = EVENTSEL_RETIRED_INSNS | AMD64_EVENTSEL_GUESTONLY;
> + wrmsr(MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0, eventsel);
> + wrmsr(MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR0, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 1: SVME=0; HG_ONLY ignored */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) & ~EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 2: Set SVME=1; Guest-Only counter stops */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) | EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_EQ(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 3: VMRUN to L2; Guest-Only counter counts */
> + generic_svm_setup(svm, l2_guest_code,
> + &l2_guest_stack[L2_GUEST_STACK_SIZE]);
> + vmcb->control.intercept &= ~(1ULL << INTERCEPT_MSR_PROT);
> +
> + run_guest(vmcb, svm->vmcb_gpa);
> +
> + GUEST_ASSERT_EQ(vmcb->control.exit_code, SVM_EXIT_VMMCALL);
> + GUEST_ASSERT(data->l2_done);
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(data->l2_delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 4: After VMEXIT to L1; Guest-Only counter stops */
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_EQ(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 5: Clear SVME; HG_ONLY ignored */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) & ~EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + GUEST_DONE();
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Test Host-Only counter across all relevant state transitions.
> + */
> +static void l1_guest_code_hostonly(struct svm_test_data *svm,
> + struct hg_test_data *data)
> +{
> + unsigned long l2_guest_stack[L2_GUEST_STACK_SIZE];
> + struct vmcb *vmcb = svm->vmcb;
> + uint64_t eventsel, delta;
> +
> + hg_data = data;
> +
> + eventsel = EVENTSEL_RETIRED_INSNS | AMD64_EVENTSEL_HOSTONLY;
> + wrmsr(MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0, eventsel);
> + wrmsr(MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR0, 0);
> +
> +
> + /* Step 1: SVME=0; HG_ONLY ignored */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) & ~EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 2: Set SVME=1; Host-Only counter still counts */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) | EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 3: VMRUN to L2; Host-Only counter stops */
> + generic_svm_setup(svm, l2_guest_code,
> + &l2_guest_stack[L2_GUEST_STACK_SIZE]);
> + vmcb->control.intercept &= ~(1ULL << INTERCEPT_MSR_PROT);
> +
> + run_guest(vmcb, svm->vmcb_gpa);
> +
> + GUEST_ASSERT_EQ(vmcb->control.exit_code, SVM_EXIT_VMMCALL);
> + GUEST_ASSERT(data->l2_done);
> + GUEST_ASSERT_EQ(data->l2_delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 4: After VMEXIT to L1; Host-Only counter counts */
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 5: Clear SVME; HG_ONLY ignored */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) & ~EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + GUEST_DONE();
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Test that both bits set is the same as neither bit set (always counts).
> + */
> +static void l1_guest_code_both_bits(struct svm_test_data *svm,
l1_guest_code gets somewhat redundant. What about these to be more descriptive
about the salient points, without creating monstrous names?
l1_test_no_filtering // very open to suggestions for a better name
l1_test_guestonly
l1_test_hostonly
l1_test_host_and_guest
Actually, why are there even separate helpers? Very off the cuff, but this seems
trivial to dedup:
static void l1_guest_code(struct svm_test_data *svm, u64 host_guest_mask)
{
const bool count_in_host = !host_guest_mask ||
(host_guest_mask & AMD64_EVENTSEL_HOSTONLY);
const bool count_in_guest = !host_guest_mask ||
(host_guest_mask & AMD64_EVENTSEL_GUESTONLY);
unsigned long l2_guest_stack[L2_GUEST_STACK_SIZE];
struct vmcb *vmcb = svm->vmcb;
uint64_t eventsel, delta;
wrmsr(MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0, EVENTSEL_RETIRED_INSNS | host_guest_mask);
wrmsr(MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR0, 0);
/* Step 1: SVME=0; host always counts */
wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) & ~EFER_SVME);
delta = run_and_measure();
GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
/* Step 2: Set SVME=1; Guest-Only counter stops */
wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) | EFER_SVME);
delta = run_and_measure();
GUEST_ASSERT(!!delta == count_in_host);
/* Step 3: VMRUN to L2; Guest-Only counter counts */
generic_svm_setup(svm, l2_guest_code,
&l2_guest_stack[L2_GUEST_STACK_SIZE]);
vmcb->control.intercept &= ~(1ULL << INTERCEPT_MSR_PROT);
run_guest(vmcb, svm->vmcb_gpa);
GUEST_ASSERT_EQ(vmcb->control.exit_code, SVM_EXIT_VMMCALL);
GUEST_ASSERT(data->l2_done);
GUEST_ASSERT(!!data->l2_delta == count_in_guest);
/* Step 4: After VMEXIT to L1; Guest-Only counter stops */
delta = run_and_measure();
GUEST_ASSERT(!!delta == count_in_host);
/* Step 5: Clear SVME; HG_ONLY ignored */
wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) & ~EFER_SVME);
delta = run_and_measure();
GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
GUEST_DONE();
}
> + struct hg_test_data *data)
> +{
> + unsigned long l2_guest_stack[L2_GUEST_STACK_SIZE];
> + struct vmcb *vmcb = svm->vmcb;
> + uint64_t eventsel, delta;
> +
> + hg_data = data;
> +
> + eventsel = EVENTSEL_RETIRED_INSNS |
> + AMD64_EVENTSEL_HOSTONLY | AMD64_EVENTSEL_GUESTONLY;
> + wrmsr(MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0, eventsel);
> + wrmsr(MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR0, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 1: SVME=0 */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) & ~EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 2: Set SVME=1 */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) | EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 3: VMRUN to L2 */
> + generic_svm_setup(svm, l2_guest_code,
> + &l2_guest_stack[L2_GUEST_STACK_SIZE]);
> + vmcb->control.intercept &= ~(1ULL << INTERCEPT_MSR_PROT);
> +
> + run_guest(vmcb, svm->vmcb_gpa);
> +
> + GUEST_ASSERT_EQ(vmcb->control.exit_code, SVM_EXIT_VMMCALL);
> + GUEST_ASSERT(data->l2_done);
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(data->l2_delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 4: After VMEXIT to L1 */
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + /* Step 5: Clear SVME */
> + wrmsr(MSR_EFER, rdmsr(MSR_EFER) & ~EFER_SVME);
> + delta = run_and_measure();
> + GUEST_ASSERT_NE(delta, 0);
> +
> + GUEST_DONE();
> +}
> +
> +static void l1_guest_code(struct svm_test_data *svm, struct hg_test_data *data,
> + int test_num)
> +{
> + switch (test_num) {
> + case 0:
As above, I would much rather pass in the mask of GUEST_HOST bits to set, and
then react accordingly, as opposed to passing in a magic/arbitrary @test_num.
Then I'm pretty sure we don't need a dispatch function, just run the testcase
using the passed in mask.
> + l1_guest_code_guestonly(svm, data);
> + break;
> + case 1:
> + l1_guest_code_hostonly(svm, data);
> + break;
> + case 2:
> + l1_guest_code_both_bits(svm, data);
> + break;
> + }
> +}
...
> +int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> +{
> + TEST_REQUIRE(kvm_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SVM));
> + TEST_REQUIRE(kvm_is_pmu_enabled());
> + TEST_REQUIRE(get_kvm_amd_param_bool("enable_mediated_pmu"));
> +
> + run_test(0, "Guest-Only counter across all transitions");
> + run_test(1, "Host-Only counter across all transitions");
> + run_test(2, "Both HG_ONLY bits set (always count)");
As alluded to above, shouldn't we also test "no bits set"?
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> --
> 2.52.0.457.g6b5491de43-goog
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-22 17:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-21 22:53 [PATCH 0/6] KVM: x86/pmu: Add support for AMD HG_ONLY bits Jim Mattson
2026-01-21 22:53 ` [PATCH 1/6] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce amd_pmu_set_eventsel_hw() Jim Mattson
2026-01-22 16:04 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-01-22 21:57 ` Jim Mattson
2026-01-21 22:54 ` [PATCH 2/6] KVM: x86/pmu: Disable HG_ONLY events as appropriate for current vCPU state Jim Mattson
2026-01-22 16:33 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-01-22 22:47 ` Jim Mattson
2026-01-22 23:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-01-21 22:54 ` [PATCH 3/6] KVM: x86/pmu: Track enabled AMD PMCs with Host-Only xor Guest-Only bits set Jim Mattson
2026-01-22 16:49 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-01-24 1:09 ` Jim Mattson
2026-01-21 22:54 ` [PATCH 4/6] KVM: x86/pmu: [De]activate HG_ONLY PMCs at SVME changes and nested transitions Jim Mattson
2026-01-22 16:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-01-28 23:43 ` Jim Mattson
2026-01-29 22:34 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-01-21 22:54 ` [PATCH 5/6] KVM: x86/pmu: Allow HG_ONLY bits with nSVM and mediated PMU Jim Mattson
2026-01-22 16:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-01-21 22:54 ` [PATCH 6/6] KVM: selftests: x86: Add svm_pmu_hg_test for HG_ONLY bits Jim Mattson
2026-01-22 17:12 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2026-01-28 23:47 ` Jim Mattson
2026-01-22 18:56 ` kernel test robot
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=aXJal3srw2-3J5Dm@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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