[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4e27adf7df5de525b9a4af9afbb3ca88ec3d09a4.camel@suse.com>
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 09:58:17 +0200
From: Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@...e.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
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
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move VMEnter and VMExit tracepoints closer to the
actual event
Hi!
On Thu, 2021-05-20 at 18:18 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 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.
>
Ok. So, if this is uncontroversial enough, we're more than happy to go
for it... For now. :-)
Let us try it, and see how things end up looking.
Thanks and Regards
--
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D
http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Virtualization Software Engineer
SUSE Labs, SUSE https://www.suse.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
<<This happens because _I_ choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists