[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YUO5J/jTMa2KGbsq@google.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 21:37:43 +0000
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
Nick Hu <nickhu@...estech.com>,
Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>,
Vincent Chen <deanbo422@...il.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-csky@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
Artem Kashkanov <artem.kashkanov@...el.com>,
Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>,
Zhu Lingshan <lingshan.zhu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks
On Sat, Aug 28, 2021, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 05:35:45PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Like Xu (2):
> > perf/core: Rework guest callbacks to prepare for static_call support
> > perf/core: Use static_call to optimize perf_guest_info_callbacks
> >
> > Sean Christopherson (11):
> > perf: Ensure perf_guest_cbs aren't reloaded between !NULL check and
> > deref
> > KVM: x86: Register perf callbacks after calling vendor's
> > hardware_setup()
> > KVM: x86: Register Processor Trace interrupt hook iff PT enabled in
> > guest
> > perf: Stop pretending that perf can handle multiple guest callbacks
> > perf: Force architectures to opt-in to guest callbacks
> > KVM: x86: Drop current_vcpu for kvm_running_vcpu + kvm_arch_vcpu
> > variable
> > KVM: x86: More precisely identify NMI from guest when handling PMI
> > KVM: Move x86's perf guest info callbacks to generic KVM
> > KVM: x86: Move Intel Processor Trace interrupt handler to vmx.c
> > KVM: arm64: Convert to the generic perf callbacks
> > KVM: arm64: Drop perf.c and fold its tiny bits of code into arm.c /
> > pmu.c
Argh, sorry, I somehow managed to miss all of your replies. I'll get back to
this series next week. Thanks for the quick response!
> Lets keep the whole intel_pt crud inside x86...
In theory, I like the idea of burying intel_pt inside x86 (and even in Intel+VMX code
for the most part), but the actual implementation is a bit gross. Because of the
whole "KVM can be a module" thing, either the static call and __static_call_return0
would need to be exported, or a new register/unregister pair would have to be exported.
The unregister path would also need its own synchronize_rcu(). In general, I
don't love duplicating the logic, but it's not the end of the world.
Either way works for me. Paolo or Peter, do either of you have a preference?
> ---
> Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/events/core.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/events/core.c
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/events/core.c
> @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ DEFINE_STATIC_CALL_RET0(x86_pmu_guest_ge
>
> DEFINE_STATIC_CALL_RET0(x86_guest_state, *(perf_guest_cbs->state));
> DEFINE_STATIC_CALL_RET0(x86_guest_get_ip, *(perf_guest_cbs->get_ip));
> -DEFINE_STATIC_CALL_RET0(x86_guest_handle_intel_pt_intr, *(perf_guest_cbs->handle_intel_pt_intr));
> +DEFINE_STATIC_CALL_RET0(x86_guest_handle_intel_pt_intr, unsigned int (*)(void));
FWIW, the param needs to be a raw function, not a function pointer.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists