lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 12:32:06 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Cc: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, Xiong Zhang <xiong.y.zhang@...ux.intel.com>, 
	pbonzini@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, mizhang@...gle.com, 
	kan.liang@...el.com, zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com, dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com, 
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zhiyuan.lv@...el.com, eranian@...gle.com, 
	irogers@...gle.com, samantha.alt@...el.com, like.xu.linux@...il.com, 
	chao.gao@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/41] perf: x86/intel: Support PERF_PMU_CAP_VPMU_PASSTHROUGH

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024, Jim Mattson wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:21 AM Liang, Kan <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > On 2024-04-11 1:04 p.m., Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2024, Xiong Zhang wrote:
> > > >> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
> > > >>
> > > >> Define and apply the PERF_PMU_CAP_VPMU_PASSTHROUGH flag for the version 4
> > > >> and later PMUs
> > > >
> > > > Why?  I get that is an RFC, but it's not at all obvious to me why this needs to
> > > > take a dependency on v4+.
> > >
> > > The IA32_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS_RESET/SET MSRs are introduced in v4. They
> > > are used in the save/restore of PMU state. Please see PATCH 23/41.
> > > So it's limited to v4+ for now.
> > 
> > Prior to version 4, semi-passthrough is possible, but IA32_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS
> > has to be intercepted and emulated, since it is non-trivial to set bits in
> > this MSR.
> 
> Ah, then this _perf_ capability should be PERF_PMU_CAP_WRITABLE_GLOBAL_STATUS or

And now I see that the capabilities are arch agnostic, whereas GLOBAL_STATUS
obviously is not.  Unless a writable GLOBAL_STATUS is a hard requirement for perf
to be able to support a mediated PMU, this capability probably doesn't need to
exist, e.g. KVM can check for a writable GLOBAL_STATUS just as easily as perf
(or perf can stuff x86_pmu_capability.writable_global_status directly).

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ