All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Hankland <ehankland@google.com>
To: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] KVM: x86: PMU Whitelist
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 08:56:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOyeoRW5wx0F=9B24h29KkhUrbaORXVSoJufb4d-XzKiAsz+NQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5CF5F6AE.90706@intel.com>

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 9:37 PM Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com> wrote:

> So, I'm not sure if "quantifying LLC contention" has been proved to
> be a real issue. If this is considered to be an issue:
>
> - without PMU, we could also write a piece of software to run in the
> guest to quantify that contention (e.g. by analyzing the memory access
> latency). How do you prevent this?
>
> - the same thing could also happen with the L1 cache (e.g. a vCPU
> and a host thread run 2 logical CPUs on the same core). If this is disabled
> as well, we may have very few events usable, and would like to see what you
> have on the whitelist.

Right - I'm aware there are other ways of detecting this - it's still
a class of events that some people don't want to surface. I'll ask if
there are any better examples.

Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-04 15:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-22 22:23 [PATCH v1] KVM: x86: PMU Whitelist Eric Hankland
2019-05-28  2:01 ` Wei Wang
2019-05-28 18:14   ` Eric Hankland
2019-05-29  7:54     ` Wei Wang
2019-05-29 17:11       ` Eric Hankland
2019-05-31  1:02         ` Wei Wang
2019-05-31 19:59           ` Eric Hankland
2019-06-01 10:55             ` Wei Wang
2019-06-03 17:30               ` Eric Hankland
2019-06-04  4:42                 ` Wei Wang
2019-06-04 15:56                   ` Eric Hankland [this message]
     [not found]                     ` <CAEU=KTHsVmrAHXUKdHu_OwcrZoy-hgV7pk4UymtchGE5bGdUGA@mail.gmail.com>
2019-06-05 21:35                       ` Eric Hankland
2019-06-06  7:36                         ` Wei Wang
2019-06-13 17:43                           ` Eric Hankland
2019-06-14  9:14                             ` Wei Wang
2019-06-14  9:26 ` Wei Wang
2019-06-25  0:32   ` Eric Hankland
2019-06-25  9:12     ` Wei Wang
2019-07-02 17:46       ` Eric Hankland
2019-07-03  9:06         ` Wei Wang
2019-06-20 18:05 ` Andi Kleen
2019-06-24 23:56   ` Eric Hankland

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='CAOyeoRW5wx0F=9B24h29KkhUrbaORXVSoJufb4d-XzKiAsz+NQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=ehankland@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.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 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.