From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Cc: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: arm64: pmu: Set the CHAINED attribute before creating the in-kernel event
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2019 11:11:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191020101129.2612-4-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191020101129.2612-1-maz@kernel.org>
The current convention for KVM to request a chained event from the
host PMU is to set bit[0] in attr.config1 (PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED).
But as it turns out, this bit gets set *after* we create the kernel
event that backs our virtual counter, meaning that we never get
a 64bit counter.
Moving the setting to an earlier point solves the problem.
Fixes: 80f393a23be6 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Support chained PMU counters")
Reviewed-by: Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
---
virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
index c30c3a74fc7f..f291d4ac3519 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
@@ -569,12 +569,12 @@ static void kvm_pmu_create_perf_event(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx)
* high counter.
*/
attr.sample_period = (-counter) & GENMASK(63, 0);
+ if (kvm_pmu_counter_is_enabled(vcpu, pmc->idx + 1))
+ attr.config1 |= PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED;
+
event = perf_event_create_kernel_counter(&attr, -1, current,
kvm_pmu_perf_overflow,
pmc + 1);
-
- if (kvm_pmu_counter_is_enabled(vcpu, pmc->idx + 1))
- attr.config1 |= PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED;
} else {
/* The initial sample period (overflow count) of an event. */
if (kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(vcpu, pmc->idx))
--
2.20.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: arm64: pmu: Set the CHAINED attribute before creating the in-kernel event
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2019 11:11:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191020101129.2612-4-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191020101129.2612-1-maz@kernel.org>
The current convention for KVM to request a chained event from the
host PMU is to set bit[0] in attr.config1 (PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED).
But as it turns out, this bit gets set *after* we create the kernel
event that backs our virtual counter, meaning that we never get
a 64bit counter.
Moving the setting to an earlier point solves the problem.
Fixes: 80f393a23be6 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Support chained PMU counters")
Reviewed-by: Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
---
virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
index c30c3a74fc7f..f291d4ac3519 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
@@ -569,12 +569,12 @@ static void kvm_pmu_create_perf_event(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx)
* high counter.
*/
attr.sample_period = (-counter) & GENMASK(63, 0);
+ if (kvm_pmu_counter_is_enabled(vcpu, pmc->idx + 1))
+ attr.config1 |= PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED;
+
event = perf_event_create_kernel_counter(&attr, -1, current,
kvm_pmu_perf_overflow,
pmc + 1);
-
- if (kvm_pmu_counter_is_enabled(vcpu, pmc->idx + 1))
- attr.config1 |= PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED;
} else {
/* The initial sample period (overflow count) of an event. */
if (kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(vcpu, pmc->idx))
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: arm64: pmu: Set the CHAINED attribute before creating the in-kernel event
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2019 11:11:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191020101129.2612-4-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191020101129.2612-1-maz@kernel.org>
The current convention for KVM to request a chained event from the
host PMU is to set bit[0] in attr.config1 (PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED).
But as it turns out, this bit gets set *after* we create the kernel
event that backs our virtual counter, meaning that we never get
a 64bit counter.
Moving the setting to an earlier point solves the problem.
Fixes: 80f393a23be6 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Support chained PMU counters")
Reviewed-by: Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
---
virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
index c30c3a74fc7f..f291d4ac3519 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/pmu.c
@@ -569,12 +569,12 @@ static void kvm_pmu_create_perf_event(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 select_idx)
* high counter.
*/
attr.sample_period = (-counter) & GENMASK(63, 0);
+ if (kvm_pmu_counter_is_enabled(vcpu, pmc->idx + 1))
+ attr.config1 |= PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED;
+
event = perf_event_create_kernel_counter(&attr, -1, current,
kvm_pmu_perf_overflow,
pmc + 1);
-
- if (kvm_pmu_counter_is_enabled(vcpu, pmc->idx + 1))
- attr.config1 |= PERF_ATTR_CFG1_KVM_PMU_CHAINED;
} else {
/* The initial sample period (overflow count) of an event. */
if (kvm_pmu_idx_is_64bit(vcpu, pmc->idx))
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-20 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-20 10:11 [GIT PULL] KVM/arm fixes for 5.4-rc5 Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` [PATCH 1/4] KVM: arm64: pmu: Fix cycle counter truncation Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: KVM: Handle PMCR_EL0.LC as RES1 on pure AArch64 systems Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2019-10-20 10:11 ` [PATCH 3/4] KVM: arm64: pmu: Set the CHAINED attribute before creating the in-kernel event Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` [PATCH 4/4] KVM: arm64: pmu: Reset sample period on overflow handling Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-20 10:11 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-22 11:34 ` [GIT PULL] KVM/arm fixes for 5.4-rc5 Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 11:34 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 11:34 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=20191020101129.2612-4-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew.murray@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.