[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111004121247.GH30105@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 14:12:47 +0200
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
joerg.roedel@....com, mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] KVM, VMX: Add support for guest/host-only profiling
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 01:24:18PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/04/2011 01:17 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
> >> I mean, CONFIG_KVM&& !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS is an unlikely
> >> combination. If you're using kvm, you usually want PERF_EVENTS.
> >>
> >Who knows. Think about someone building appliance with embedded KVM and
> >trying to achieve minimal code footprint.
>
> Saving a few dozen bytes, then launching a 1GB guest?
>
> >It is much easier to add ifdefs
> >at the development stage then trying to figure out later what can be
> >ifdeffed. If we will do:
> > if (!(cnt = perf_guest_get_msrs_count())
> > return;
> >
> >at the beginning of atomic_switch_perf_msrs() then compiler can
> >eliminate dead code in case of !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS since
> >perf_guest_get_msrs_count() will become 0, but this will add two
> >function calls on vmentry in CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS case.
> >
>
> Then move it to the beginning:
>
> nr_msrs = perf_get_guest_msrs(&msr_buffer);
> for (i = 0; i < nr_msrs; ++i)
> add_atomic_switch_msr((*msr_buffer)[i], nr);
>
> the compiler will kill the loop if nr_msrs is statically 0.
>
Good idea. Just get rid of perf_guest_get_msrs_count().
--
Gleb.
--
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