[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <286AC319A985734F985F78AFA26841F739848A07@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 02:21:19 +0000
From: "Wang, Wei W" <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"rkrcmar@...hat.com" <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
"Xu, Like" <like.xu@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1] KVM/x86/vPMU: Guest PMI Optimization
On Saturday, October 13, 2018 12:31 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > 4. Results
> > - Without this optimization, the guest pmi handling time is
> > ~4500000 ns, and the max sampling rate is reduced to 250.
> > - With this optimization, the guest pmi handling time is ~9000 ns
> > (i.e. 1 / 500 of the non-optimization case), and the max sampling
> > rate remains at the original 100000.
>
> Impressive performance improvement!
>
> It's not clear to me why you're special casing PMIs here. The optimization
> should work generically, right?
Yes, seems doable. I plan to try some lazy approach for the perf event allocation.
> Is that guaranteed to be always called on the right CPU that will run the vcpu?
>
> AFAIK there's an ioctl to set MSRs in the guest from qemu, I'm pretty sure it
> won't handle that.
Thanks, will consider that case.
Best,
Wei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists