[PULL 11/12] arm64: KVM: remove misleading comment on pmu status

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



From: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@xxxxxxx>

Comment about how PMU access is handled is not relavant since v4.6
where proper PMU support was added in.

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@xxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 8 --------
 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index b0b225c..af5ea86 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
@@ -823,14 +823,6 @@ static bool access_pmuserenr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct sys_reg_params *p,
  * Architected system registers.
  * Important: Must be sorted ascending by Op0, Op1, CRn, CRm, Op2
  *
- * We could trap ID_DFR0 and tell the guest we don't support performance
- * monitoring.  Unfortunately the patch to make the kernel check ID_DFR0 was
- * NAKed, so it will read the PMCR anyway.
- *
- * Therefore we tell the guest we have 0 counters.  Unfortunately, we
- * must always support PMCCNTR (the cycle counter): we just RAZ/WI for
- * all PM registers, which doesn't crash the guest kernel at least.
- *
  * Debug handling: We do trap most, if not all debug related system
  * registers. The implementation is good enough to ensure that a guest
  * can use these with minimal performance degradation. The drawback is
-- 
2.9.0

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux