On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 20:05:57 +1000, Brock said:
> On Thu, 2019-09-26 at 15:45 +0900, Sahibzada Irfanullah wrote:
> > Thank you very for your help. I have checked the ftrace, and perf. I
> > think it won't work for me.I am not analyzing/tracing the the kernel.
> > I want to develop my own dynamic tool like Pin Tool  (or moudule
> > which can be loaded/unloaded at run time dynamically), so that I can
> > easily tune/modify for different purposes , and to get any type of
> > specific information from the kernel/KVM, espcecially in the context
> > of virtualization (guest and/or host memory management). That's why I
> > take a start from generating the log of guest physical addresses from
> > the kernel by saving it to the file; with the passage of time, I will
> > add the funcationalities to it.
> > Thank you.
> I'm not sure if it's hardware addresses but you can get kernel/user/kvm
> page fault information with:

I admit I'm still mystified by the requirement for the hardware address rather than
the virtual address, when doing any sort of analytics is going to require mapping
back to a process and virtual address - and possibly incorrectly (consider a page fault
from an instruction in a shared library that's mmap'ed into 250 running processes, like
glibc...)