kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
	Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	ak@linux.intel.com, wei.w.wang@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 05/11] perf/x86: Keep LBR stack unchanged in host context for guest LBR event
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 12:45:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200519104520.GE279861@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dd6b0ab0-0209-e1e5-550c-24e2ad101b15@linux.intel.com>

On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 11:08:41AM +0800, Like Xu wrote:

> Sure, I could reuse cpuc->intel_ctrl_guest_mask to rewrite this part:
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> index d788edb7c1f9..f1243e8211ca 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> @@ -2189,7 +2189,8 @@ static void intel_pmu_disable_event(struct perf_event
> *event)
>         } else if (idx == INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_BTS) {
>                 intel_pmu_disable_bts();
>                 intel_pmu_drain_bts_buffer();
> -       }
> +       } else if (idx == INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_VLBR)
> +               intel_clear_masks(event, idx);
> 
>         /*
>          * Needs to be called after x86_pmu_disable_event,
> @@ -2271,7 +2272,8 @@ static void intel_pmu_enable_event(struct perf_event
> *event)
>                 if (!__this_cpu_read(cpu_hw_events.enabled))
>                         return;
>                 intel_pmu_enable_bts(hwc->config);
> -       }
> +       } else if (idx == INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_VLBR)
> +               intel_set_masks(event, idx);
>  }

This makes me wonder if we can pull intel_{set,clear}_masks() out of
that if()-forest, but that's something for later...

>  static void intel_pmu_add_event(struct perf_event *event)
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> index b8dabf1698d6..1b30c76815dd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> @@ -552,11 +552,19 @@ void intel_pmu_lbr_del(struct perf_event *event)
>         perf_sched_cb_dec(event->ctx->pmu);
>  }
> 
> +static inline bool vlbr_is_enabled(void)
> +{
> +       struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> +
> +       return test_bit(INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED_VLBR,
> +               (unsigned long *)&cpuc->intel_ctrl_guest_mask);
> +}

Maybe call this: vlbr_exclude_host() ?

> +
>  void intel_pmu_lbr_enable_all(bool pmi)
>  {
>         struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> 
> -       if (cpuc->lbr_users)
> +       if (cpuc->lbr_users && !vlbr_is_enabled())
>                 __intel_pmu_lbr_enable(pmi);
>  }
> 
> @@ -564,7 +572,7 @@ void intel_pmu_lbr_disable_all(void)
>  {
>         struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> 
> -       if (cpuc->lbr_users)
> +       if (cpuc->lbr_users && !vlbr_is_enabled())
>                 __intel_pmu_lbr_disable();
>  }
> 
> @@ -706,7 +714,8 @@ void intel_pmu_lbr_read(void)
>          * This could be smarter and actually check the event,
>          * but this simple approach seems to work for now.
>          */
> -       if (!cpuc->lbr_users || cpuc->lbr_users == cpuc->lbr_pebs_users)
> +       if (!cpuc->lbr_users || vlbr_is_enabled() ||
> +               cpuc->lbr_users == cpuc->lbr_pebs_users)
>                 return;
> 
>         if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.lbr_format == LBR_FORMAT_32)
> 
> Is this acceptable to you ?

Yeah, looks about right. Let me stare at the rest.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-19 10:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-14  8:30 [PATCH v11 00/11] Guest Last Branch Recording Enabling Like Xu
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 01/11] perf/x86: Fix variable types for LBR registers Like Xu
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 02/11] perf/x86/core: Refactor hw->idx checks and cleanup Like Xu
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 03/11] perf/x86/lbr: Add interface to get basic information about LBR stack Like Xu
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 04/11] perf/x86: Add constraint to create guest LBR event without hw counter Like Xu
2020-05-18 11:43   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 05/11] perf/x86: Keep LBR stack unchanged in host context for guest LBR event Like Xu
2020-05-18 11:59   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-18 12:02   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-19  3:08     ` Like Xu
2020-05-19 10:45       ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2020-05-19 13:25         ` Xu, Like
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 06/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Tweak kvm_pmu_get_msr to pass 'struct msr_data' in Like Xu
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 07/11] KVM: x86: Expose MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES for LBR record format Like Xu
2020-05-19 10:53   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-19 12:19     ` Xu, Like
2020-05-19 15:12     ` Sean Christopherson
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 08/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Emulate LBR feature via guest LBR event Like Xu
2020-05-19 11:00   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-19 12:24     ` Xu, Like
2020-05-19 11:01   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-19 12:28     ` Xu, Like
2020-05-19 11:03   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-19 12:40     ` Xu, Like
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 09/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Release guest LBR event via vPMU lazy release mechanism Like Xu
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 10/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Check guest LBR availability in case host reclaims them Like Xu
2020-05-19 11:15   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-19 13:10     ` Xu, Like
2020-05-19 14:57       ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-05-20  2:01         ` Xu, Like
2020-05-27  8:17           ` Like Xu
2020-05-14  8:30 ` [PATCH v11 11/11] KVM: x86/pmu: Reduce the overhead of LBR passthrough or cancellation Like Xu
2020-05-27  8:28 ` [PATCH v11 00/11] Guest Last Branch Recording Enabling Xu, Like

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=20200519104520.GE279861@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jmattson@google.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=like.xu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
    --cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
    --cc=wei.w.wang@intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).