[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YUTIIG4ZCKMbqrFi@google.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:53:52 +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 Fri, Sep 17, 2021, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 09:37:43PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> So I don't mind exporting __static_call_return0, but exporting a raw
> static_call is much like exporting a function pointer :/
Ya, that part is quite gross.
> > 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?
>
> Can we de-feature kvm as a module and only have this PT functionality
> when built-in? :-)
I agree that many of the for-KVM exports are ugly, especially several of the
perf exports, but I will fight tooth and nail to keep KVM-as-a-module. It is
invaluable for development and testing, and in the not-too-distant future there
is KVM-maintenance related functionality that we'd like to implement that relies
on KVM being a module.
I would be more than happy to help explore approaches that reduce the for-KVM
exports, but I am strongly opposed to defeaturing KVM-as-a-module. I have a few
nascent ideas for eliminating a handful of a random exports, but no clever ideas
for eliminating perf's for-KVM exports.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists