[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ab44e5b1-4448-d6c8-6cda-5e41866f69f1@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 18:18:38 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Stefano De Venuto <stefano.devenuto99@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vkuznets@...hat.com,
wanpengli@...cent.com, jmattson@...gle.com, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
y.karadz@...il.com, Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move VMEnter and VMExit tracepoints closer to the actual
event
On 20/05/21 17:32, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On VMX, I think the tracepoint can be moved below the VMWRITEs without much
> contention (though doing so is likely a nop), but moving it below
> kvm_load_guest_xsave_state() requires a bit more discussion.
Indeed; as a rule of thumb, the tracepoint on SVM could match the
clgi/stgi region, and on VMX it could be placed in a similar location.
Paolo
> I 100% agree that the current behavior can be a bit confusing, but I wonder if
> we'd be better off "solving" that problem through documentation.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists