From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE8FEC433ED for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:34:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8563611CD for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:34:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232375AbhDOLfN (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:35:13 -0400 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]:17001 "EHLO szxga05-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230056AbhDOLfL (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:35:11 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FLcck3HcWzPpxD; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:31:50 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.187.224] (10.174.187.224) by DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:34:40 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Divorce the perf code from oprofile helpers To: Marc Zyngier References: <20210414134409.1266357-1-maz@kernel.org> <20210414134409.1266357-2-maz@kernel.org> <87h7k7n81z.wl-maz@kernel.org> CC: , , , , , , Rich Felker , Yoshinori Sato , "Peter Zijlstra" , Viresh Kumar , Heiko Carstens , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , , Christian Borntraeger , , Will Deacon From: Keqian Zhu Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:34:40 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87h7k7n81z.wl-maz@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.187.224] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org Hi Marc, On 2021/4/15 18:42, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:59:26 +0100, > Keqian Zhu wrote: >> >> Hi Marc, >> >> On 2021/4/14 21:44, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> KVM/arm64 is the sole user of perf_num_counters(), and really >>> could do without it. Stop using the obsolete API by relying on >>> the existing probing code. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier >>> --- >>> arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c | 7 +------ >>> arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c | 2 +- >>> include/kvm/arm_pmu.h | 4 ++++ >>> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> index 739164324afe..b8b398670ef2 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> @@ -50,12 +50,7 @@ static struct perf_guest_info_callbacks kvm_guest_cbs = { >>> >>> int kvm_perf_init(void) >>> { >>> - /* >>> - * Check if HW_PERF_EVENTS are supported by checking the number of >>> - * hardware performance counters. This could ensure the presence of >>> - * a physical PMU and CONFIG_PERF_EVENT is selected. >>> - */ >>> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_PMU) && perf_num_counters() > 0) >>> + if (kvm_pmu_probe_pmuver() != 0xf) >> The probe() function may be called many times >> (kvm_arm_pmu_v3_set_attr also calls it). I don't know whether the >> first calling is enough. If so, can we use a static variable in it, >> so the following calling can return the result right away? > > No, because that wouldn't help with crappy big-little implementations > that could have PMUs with different versions. We want to find the > version at the point where the virtual PMU is created, which is why we > call the probe function once per vcpu. I see. But AFAICS the pmuver is placed in kvm->arch, and the probe function is called once per VM. Maybe I miss something. > > This of course is broken in other ways (BL+KVM is a total disaster > when it comes to PMU), but making this static would just make it > worse. OK. Thanks, Keqian From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E824C43460 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:34:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE0BA6124B for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:34:55 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DE0BA6124B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E894B50D; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:34:55 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mKV9ub0AcP7x; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:34:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476004B434; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:34:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9D8F4B434 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:34:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PfmSRGMELllp for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:34:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com (szxga05-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.191]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C90D4B405 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:34:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FLcck3HcWzPpxD; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:31:50 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.187.224] (10.174.187.224) by DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:34:40 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Divorce the perf code from oprofile helpers To: Marc Zyngier References: <20210414134409.1266357-1-maz@kernel.org> <20210414134409.1266357-2-maz@kernel.org> <87h7k7n81z.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Keqian Zhu Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:34:40 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87h7k7n81z.wl-maz@kernel.org> X-Originating-IP: [10.174.187.224] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Rich Felker , Yoshinori Sato , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Viresh Kumar , Heiko Carstens , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , nathan@kernel.org, Christian Borntraeger , Will Deacon , kernel-team@android.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Hi Marc, On 2021/4/15 18:42, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:59:26 +0100, > Keqian Zhu wrote: >> >> Hi Marc, >> >> On 2021/4/14 21:44, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> KVM/arm64 is the sole user of perf_num_counters(), and really >>> could do without it. Stop using the obsolete API by relying on >>> the existing probing code. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier >>> --- >>> arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c | 7 +------ >>> arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c | 2 +- >>> include/kvm/arm_pmu.h | 4 ++++ >>> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> index 739164324afe..b8b398670ef2 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> @@ -50,12 +50,7 @@ static struct perf_guest_info_callbacks kvm_guest_cbs = { >>> >>> int kvm_perf_init(void) >>> { >>> - /* >>> - * Check if HW_PERF_EVENTS are supported by checking the number of >>> - * hardware performance counters. This could ensure the presence of >>> - * a physical PMU and CONFIG_PERF_EVENT is selected. >>> - */ >>> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_PMU) && perf_num_counters() > 0) >>> + if (kvm_pmu_probe_pmuver() != 0xf) >> The probe() function may be called many times >> (kvm_arm_pmu_v3_set_attr also calls it). I don't know whether the >> first calling is enough. If so, can we use a static variable in it, >> so the following calling can return the result right away? > > No, because that wouldn't help with crappy big-little implementations > that could have PMUs with different versions. We want to find the > version at the point where the virtual PMU is created, which is why we > call the probe function once per vcpu. I see. But AFAICS the pmuver is placed in kvm->arch, and the probe function is called once per VM. Maybe I miss something. > > This of course is broken in other ways (BL+KVM is a total disaster > when it comes to PMU), but making this static would just make it > worse. OK. Thanks, Keqian _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46F35C433B4 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:36:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B503F610CB for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:36:34 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B503F610CB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=desiato.20200630; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:CC: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=qp1aEKt+jlNnMS+9OQ8Iz1nV03YuWmdOSiAySQahptk=; b=JqbYyKO37sRrWfJ6FNqquGZzO eWVqBWvzC0nFRtDtoK5Hlm/kLwBRTF1N7p0XVY52x5kZRVaT/Wg7JCJSLwJCglbXbtPHOJgjVKY2p PN5xTWmwIpag3HDBu4jbf15V7AOrPbutza6dnvzGYTROsO+I10HqGafnu45kFKJEPKVM9mdIk2UMA HnQnqR5exthrORJlGcjQbk9RcUyOeSgWvGsYf1F0khw17z277FnWa/3fhe17XQ8iaSpi8rvMAQulA Exyt0q4pXjo/W0lAl3aew6we0pPV3LebFRk7zUnEnDEVAnqhmweiwQ0cgV4A1XnYQDPClBXs74/B3 tpnTzN3SQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=desiato.infradead.org) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lX0Gu-00FyoF-4c; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:34:57 +0000 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([2607:7c80:54:e::133]) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lX0Gr-00Fynm-6N for linux-arm-kernel@desiato.infradead.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:34:53 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:CC:References:To: Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=m7TJwp/aToUPhhr8EYtvRwIX55iBqLEN1odimdZLKAw=; b=XHQ33bChf5JPgo9tIyIS6RCQrO 9GkF6QPdBmR6Kkf7KARjo8RWBNW72uDP8lSE9mpYvtjLiCOSnzWKqbNIC5IJAgk9uIu9GfsaYTBcD OyNlDfKXeCYT+fcptAuoEUzaXfT7qxOTeX4PWfTuY9Ljmil9tO5/kfv3HXYMEAk6D5+VcqBXG723K vKSN37gAOZlYN/62j/17A9l95ZG5y62La5PrfR2ALWVq4Mu8aVpzvFk52RkwIcVrmXdyRuZnhdWEt TiMvL73RJ5nwYCGgbYUwtQWCmUAkEnZ9xTXmR7SNQkui/wNK7THFB7fMtK3NbHpoKbBzwxzaIvHY9 LMzNpHOg==; Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lX0Go-008XAD-An for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:34:51 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FLcck3HcWzPpxD; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:31:50 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.187.224] (10.174.187.224) by DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:34:40 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm64: Divorce the perf code from oprofile helpers To: Marc Zyngier References: <20210414134409.1266357-1-maz@kernel.org> <20210414134409.1266357-2-maz@kernel.org> <87h7k7n81z.wl-maz@kernel.org> CC: , , , , , , Rich Felker , Yoshinori Sato , "Peter Zijlstra" , Viresh Kumar , Heiko Carstens , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , , Christian Borntraeger , , Will Deacon From: Keqian Zhu Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 19:34:40 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87h7k7n81z.wl-maz@kernel.org> X-Originating-IP: [10.174.187.224] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210415_043450_565972_F2A9BDCC X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 19.57 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Marc, On 2021/4/15 18:42, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 07:59:26 +0100, > Keqian Zhu wrote: >> >> Hi Marc, >> >> On 2021/4/14 21:44, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> KVM/arm64 is the sole user of perf_num_counters(), and really >>> could do without it. Stop using the obsolete API by relying on >>> the existing probing code. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier >>> --- >>> arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c | 7 +------ >>> arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c | 2 +- >>> include/kvm/arm_pmu.h | 4 ++++ >>> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> index 739164324afe..b8b398670ef2 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/perf.c >>> @@ -50,12 +50,7 @@ static struct perf_guest_info_callbacks kvm_guest_cbs = { >>> >>> int kvm_perf_init(void) >>> { >>> - /* >>> - * Check if HW_PERF_EVENTS are supported by checking the number of >>> - * hardware performance counters. This could ensure the presence of >>> - * a physical PMU and CONFIG_PERF_EVENT is selected. >>> - */ >>> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_PMU) && perf_num_counters() > 0) >>> + if (kvm_pmu_probe_pmuver() != 0xf) >> The probe() function may be called many times >> (kvm_arm_pmu_v3_set_attr also calls it). I don't know whether the >> first calling is enough. If so, can we use a static variable in it, >> so the following calling can return the result right away? > > No, because that wouldn't help with crappy big-little implementations > that could have PMUs with different versions. We want to find the > version at the point where the virtual PMU is created, which is why we > call the probe function once per vcpu. I see. But AFAICS the pmuver is placed in kvm->arch, and the probe function is called once per VM. Maybe I miss something. > > This of course is broken in other ways (BL+KVM is a total disaster > when it comes to PMU), but making this static would just make it > worse. OK. Thanks, Keqian _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel