[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C1F5452.3000107@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 15:00:18 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Fr??d??ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
oerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@...hat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>, zhiteng.huang@...el.com,
tim.c.chen@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/5] ara virt interface of perf to support kvm guest
os statistics collection in guest os
On 06/21/2010 12:31 PM, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> The 2nd patch is to change the definition of perf_event to facilitate
> perf attr copy when a hypercall happens.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yanmin<yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
>
> ---
>
> --- linux-2.6_tip0620/include/linux/perf_event.h 2010-06-21 15:19:52.821999849 +0800
> +++ linux-2.6_tip0620perfkvm/include/linux/perf_event.h 2010-06-21 16:53:49.283999849 +0800
> @@ -188,7 +188,10 @@ struct perf_event_attr {
> __u64 sample_type;
> __u64 read_format;
>
>
Assuming these flags are available to the guest?
> - __u64 disabled : 1, /* off by default */
> + union {
> + __u64 flags;
> + struct {
> + __u64 disabled : 1, /* off by default */
> inherit : 1, /* children inherit it */
>
inherit is meaningless for a guest.
> pinned : 1, /* must always be on PMU */
>
We cannot allow a guest to pin a counter.
The other flags are also problematic. I'd like to see virt-specific
flags (probably we'll only need kernel/user and nested_hv for nested
virtualization).
Something that is worrying is that we don't expose group information.
perf will multiplex the events for us, but there will be a loss in accuracy.
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT
> #include<asm/hw_breakpoint.h>
> #endif
> @@ -753,6 +752,20 @@ struct perf_event {
>
> perf_overflow_handler_t overflow_handler;
>
> + /*
> + * pointers used by kvm perf paravirt interface.
> + *
> + * 1) Used in host kernel and points to host_perf_shadow which
> + * has information about guest perf_event
> + */
> + void *host_perf_shadow;
>
Can we have real types instead of void pointers?
> + /*
> + * 2) Used in guest kernel and points to guest_perf_shadow which
> + * is used as a communication area with host kernel. Host kernel
> + * copies overflow data to it when an event overflows.
> + */
> + void *guest_perf_shadow;
>
It's strange to see both guest and host parts in the same patch.
Splitting to separate patches will really help review.
> @@ -1626,9 +1629,22 @@ void perf_event_task_tick(struct task_st
> if (ctx&& ctx->nr_events&& ctx->nr_events != ctx->nr_active)
> rotate = 1;
>
> - perf_ctx_adjust_freq(&cpuctx->ctx);
> - if (ctx)
> - perf_ctx_adjust_freq(ctx);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_PERF
> + if (kvm_para_available()) {
> + /*
> + * perf_ctx_adjust_freq causes lots of pmu->read which would
> + * trigger too many vmexit to host kernel. We disable it
> + * under para virt situation
> + */
> + adjust_freq = 0;
> + }
> +#endif
>
Perhaps we can have a batch read interface which will read many counters
at once. This would reduce the number of exits. Also adjust the
frequency less frequently.
> +
> + if (adjust_freq) {
> + perf_ctx_adjust_freq(&cpuctx->ctx);
> + if (ctx)
> + perf_ctx_adjust_freq(ctx);
> + }
>
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists