linux-kernel - Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH 0/2][KVM] guest time accounting

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:30:22 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
To:	Laurent Vivier <Laurent.Vivier@...l.net>
CC:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH 0/2][KVM] guest time accounting

Laurent Vivier wrote:
> Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>   
>> Am Freitag, 10. August 2007 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
>>     
>>> The aim of these two patches is to measure the CPU time used by a virtual
>>> machine. All comments are welcome... I'm not sure it's the good way to do 
>>>       
>> that.
>>
>> I did something similar for or s390guest prototype, that Carsten posted in 
>> May.  I decided to account guest time to the user process instead of adding a 
>> new field to avoid hazzle with old top. As you can read in the patch comment, 
>> I personally prefer a new field if we can get one.
>>
>> My implementation uses a similar mechanism like hard and softirq. So I have an 
>> sie_enter an sie_exit and a task_is_in_sie function - like irq_enter and 
>> irq_exit. The main difference is based on the fact, that s390 has precise 
>> accouting for irq, steal, user and system time, and therefore my patch is 
>> based on architecture specifc code using CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNT. 
>>
>> In general my patch has the same idea as your patch, so I am going to review 
>> your patch and see if it would fit for s390.
>>
>> For reference this is the (never posted) old patch for our virtualisation 
>> prototype. It wont work with kvm but it gives you the idea what we had in 
>> mind on s390.
>>
>>     
>
> thank you for your comment.
>
> As virtualization becomes very popular, perhaps we should implement something
> which could be used by all linux supported architectures ?
> (yes, I know it's non-sense for archs like m68k...)
> But my [PATCH 1/2] can be a good start (adding "guest" in cpustat)
> As guest accounting is hw dependent, I think we should add a hook in the
> accounting functions.
>   

Isn't PF_VM exactly such a hook?  All the hypervisor needs to do is to 
set/unset it correctly?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/