On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 01:25:32PM +0000, Andrew Murray wrote: > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 01:02:26PM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:29:32AM +0000, Andrew Murray wrote: > > > Add support for the :G and :H attributes in perf by handling the > > > exclude_host/exclude_guest event attributes. > > > > > > We notify KVM of counters that we wish to be enabled or disabled on > > > guest entry/exit and thus defer from starting or stopping :G events > > > as per the events exclude_host attribute. > > > > > > With both VHE and non-VHE we switch the counters between host/guest > > > at EL2. We are able to eliminate counters counting host events on > > > the boundaries of guest entry/exit when using :G by filtering out > > > EL2 for exclude_host. However when using :H unless exclude_hv is set > > > on non-VHE then there is a small blackout window at the guest > > > entry/exit where host events are not captured. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@xxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > > > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > > > index de564ae..4a3c73d 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c > > > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ > > > > > > #include <linux/acpi.h> > > > #include <linux/clocksource.h> > > > +#include <linux/kvm_host.h> > > > #include <linux/of.h> > > > #include <linux/perf/arm_pmu.h> > > > #include <linux/platform_device.h> > > > @@ -647,11 +648,26 @@ static inline int armv8pmu_enable_counter(int idx) > > > > > > static inline void armv8pmu_enable_event_counter(struct perf_event *event) > > > { > > > + struct perf_event_attr *attr = &event->attr; > > > int idx = event->hw.idx; > > > + int flags = 0; > > > + u32 counter_bits = BIT(ARMV8_IDX_TO_COUNTER(idx)); > > > > > > - armv8pmu_enable_counter(idx); > > > if (armv8pmu_event_is_chained(event)) > > > - armv8pmu_enable_counter(idx - 1); > > > + counter_bits |= BIT(ARMV8_IDX_TO_COUNTER(idx - 1)); > > > + > > > + if (!attr->exclude_host) > > > + flags |= KVM_PMU_EVENTS_HOST; > > > + if (!attr->exclude_guest) > > > + flags |= KVM_PMU_EVENTS_GUEST; > > > + > > > + kvm_set_pmu_events(counter_bits, flags); > > > + > > > + if (!attr->exclude_host) { > > > + armv8pmu_enable_counter(idx); > > > + if (armv8pmu_event_is_chained(event)) > > > + armv8pmu_enable_counter(idx - 1); > > > + } > > > } > > > > > > static inline int armv8pmu_disable_counter(int idx) > > > @@ -664,11 +680,20 @@ static inline int armv8pmu_disable_counter(int idx) > > > static inline void armv8pmu_disable_event_counter(struct perf_event *event) > > > { > > > struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw; > > > + struct perf_event_attr *attr = &event->attr; > > > int idx = hwc->idx; > > > + u32 counter_bits = BIT(ARMV8_IDX_TO_COUNTER(idx)); > > > > > > if (armv8pmu_event_is_chained(event)) > > > - armv8pmu_disable_counter(idx - 1); > > > - armv8pmu_disable_counter(idx); > > > + counter_bits |= BIT(ARMV8_IDX_TO_COUNTER(idx - 1)); > > > + > > > + kvm_clr_pmu_events(counter_bits); > > > + > > > + if (!attr->exclude_host) { > > > + if (armv8pmu_event_is_chained(event)) > > > + armv8pmu_disable_counter(idx - 1); > > > + armv8pmu_disable_counter(idx); > > > + } > > > } > > > > > > static inline int armv8pmu_enable_intens(int idx) > > > @@ -943,16 +968,25 @@ static int armv8pmu_set_event_filter(struct hw_perf_event *event, > > > * Therefore we ignore exclude_hv in this configuration, since > > > * there's no hypervisor to sample anyway. This is consistent > > > * with other architectures (x86 and Power). > > > + * > > > + * To eliminate counting host events on the boundaries of > > > + * guest entry/exit we ensure EL2 is not included in hyp mode > > > + * with !exclude_host. > > > */ > > > if (is_kernel_in_hyp_mode()) { > > > - if (!attr->exclude_kernel) > > > + if (!attr->exclude_kernel && !attr->exclude_host) > > > config_base |= ARMV8_PMU_INCLUDE_EL2; > > > } else { > > > - if (attr->exclude_kernel) > > > - config_base |= ARMV8_PMU_EXCLUDE_EL1; > > > if (!attr->exclude_hv) > > > config_base |= ARMV8_PMU_INCLUDE_EL2; > > > > I'm not sure about the current use of exclude_hv here. The comment says > > it's consistent with other architectures, but I can't find an example to > > confirm this, and I don't think we have a comparable thing to the split > > of the hypervisor between EL1 and EL2 we have on non-VHE. > > > > Joerg told me the semantics were designed to be: > > > > exclude_hv: When running as a guest, stop counting events when > > the HV runs. > > Can the definition of "guest" here refer to both type 1 and type 2 > hypervisor guests? Or do we assume type 1 only? > A guest is a guest. Linux can run as a guest under a hypervisor with a type 1 or type 2 design, doesn't matter for this conversation. > > > > exclude_host: When Linux runs as a HV itself, only count events > > while a guest is running. > > > > exclude_guest: When Linux runs as a HV, only count events when > > running in host mode. > > > > (But tools/perf/design.txt does not really confirm this). > > > > On arm64 that would mean: > > > > exclude_hv: As a host, no effect. > > As a guest, set the counter to include EL2 for a > > hypervisor to emulate. [...] > > Though more correctly we should count EL2 *and EL1* events whilst pinned > to the KVM task and whilst running outside of the guest. This then > covers both !VHE and VHE and allows for fair comparasion between !VHE > and VHE systems. Yes, if the guest has cleared exclude_hv and if we can properly detect that from the hypervisor. > > This then gives us the unique benefit of the type 2 host being able to > examine the hypervisor overhead of its individual guests. Not sure I understand this part. > > The only issue here is that the type 2 host wouldn't be able to examine > the HV overhead of all its guests across the system as you wouldn't be > able to rely on the perf task pinning to distinguish between EL1 from > host and EL1 from guests in a !VHE system. I'm not sure the best way > to overcome this limitation. Why can't you disable EL1 counting whilst running in the host, and enable EL1 counting whilst running in the guest? > > > > exclude_host: As a guest, has no effect. > > Don't count EL1 host or EL2, but count EL1 guest > > by enabling EL1 counting at EL2 when entering a > > guest, and disabling EL1 counting when returning > > from a guest. > > > > exclude_guest: As a guest, has no effect. As a host, disable > > EL1 counting at EL2 when entering a guest. > > > > Not sure if we break anything by changing the behavior on arm64 now, but > > I really doubt that being able to exclude an arbitrary part (the one tha > > happens to run in EL2 on non-VHE systems) is meaningful, and the fact > > that behavior and semantics change depending on the version of the > > underlying CPU is not great, if what you care about is understanding the > > system's performance. > > This is a bit strange. It's arbitary as it only represents a bit of the > HV overhead - this is solved though by counting the whole overhead (EL1 > and EL2 instead (but only counting outside the guest and pinned to the > guest tasks). Not sure I understand your point here? > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Though if I've understood you correctly, you're suggesting that the only > time we count EL2 is when exclude_hv is not set on the immediate guest > of a type 1 hypervisor? > No, I didn't say anything about a type 1 or type 2 hypervisor, and I think that distinction is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I also don't know what an immediate guest is -- is there any other kind? I don't think exclude_hv, exclude_host, and exclude_guest are directly tied to a single CPU mode. The only 'modes' you need to consider for Linux are 'guest' and 'host' when Linux can run VMs and, 'self' and 'hypervisor' when Linux is a guest. When Linux can run VMs, you count EL2 events when exclude_host is not set. (When Linux is a guest, and you set/clear exclude_hv, for this to work, you need some way of informing your hypervisor that you want to know about events happening in the hypervisor. This could be a PV interface, or maybe this can work by the guest setting/clearing the NSH bit in its virtual PMU registers, which then amusingly can get translated into actually counting in EL1/EL2 (non-VHE) or EL2 (VHE) by KVM's PMU emulation code. The method used is specific to the hypervisor used, but not specific to whether the hypervisor is type-1 or type-2.) Thanks, Christoffer _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm