Hi Paolo,
On 2021/1/27 14:04, Like Xu wrote:
On 2021/1/26 17:42, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 08/01/21 02:36, Like Xu wrote:
@@ -401,6 +398,9 @@ static void intel_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
pmu->fixed_counters[i].idx = i + INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED;
pmu->fixed_counters[i].current_config = 0;
}
+
+ vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities = guest_cpuid_has(vcpu,
X86_FEATURE_PDCM) ?
+ vmx_get_perf_capabilities() : 0;
There is one thing I don't understand with this patch: intel_pmu_init is
not called when CPUID is changed. So I would have thought that anything
that uses guest_cpuid_has must stay in intel_pmu_refresh. As I
understand it vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities is always set to 0
(vmx_get_perf_capabilities is never called), and kvm_set_msr_common
would fail to set any bit in the MSR. What am I missing?
In addition, the code of patch 4:
+ if (!intel_pmu_lbr_is_enabled(vcpu)) {
+ vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities &= ~PMU_CAP_LBR_FMT;
+ lbr_desc->records.nr = 0;
+ }
is not okay after MSR changes. The value written by the host must be
either rejected (with "return 1") or applied unchanged.
Fortunately I think this code is dead if you move the check in
kvm_set_msr from patch 9 to patch 4. However, in patch 9
vmx_get_perf_capabilities() must only set the LBR format bits if
intel_pmu_lbr_is_compatible(vcpu).
Thanks for the guidance. How about handling it in this way:
In the intel_pmu_init():
vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities = 0;
lbr_desc->records.nr = 0;
In the intel_pmu_refresh():
if (guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_PDCM)) {
vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities = vmx_get_perf_capabilities();
if (!lbr_desc->records.nr)
vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities &= ~PMU_CAP_LBR_FMT;
}
In the vmx_set_msr():
case MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES:
// set up lbr_desc->records.nr
if (!intel_pmu_lbr_is_compatible(vcpu))
return 1;
ret = kvm_set_msr_common(vcpu, msr_info);
In the kvm_set_msr_common():
case MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES:
vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities = data;
kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu);
The new version will make the vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities crud as simple
as possible.
The patches look good apart from these issues and the other nits I
pointed out. However, you need testcases here, for both kvm-unit-tests
and tools/testing/selftests/kvm.
For KVM, it would be at least a basic check that looks for the MSR LBR
(using the MSR indices for the various processors), does a branch, and
checks that the FROM_IP/TO_IP are good. You can write the
kvm-unit-tests using the QEMU option "-cpu host,migratable=no": if you
do this, QEMU will pick the KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID bits and move them
more or less directly into the guest CPUID.
For tools/testing/selftests/kvm, your test need to check the effect of
various CPUID settings on the PERF_CAPABILITIES MSR, check that whatever
you write with KVM_SET_MSR is _not_ modified and can be retrieved with
KVM_GET_MSR, and check that invalid LBR formats are rejected.
Thanks, I will add the above tests in the next version.
I'm really, really sorry for leaving these patches on my todo list for
months, but you guys need to understand the main reason for this: they
come with no testcases. A large patch series adding userspace APIs and
complicated CPUID/MSR processing *automatically* goes to the bottom of
my queue, because:
Please review the new version
https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20210201051039.255478-1-like.xu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
and kvm-unit-tests:
https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20210201045751.243231-1-like.xu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
in case the patch set is not *automatically* processed to the bottom of
your queue.
I'll also add tests for other new vPMU features.
---
thx, likexu
- I need to go with a fine comb over all the userspace API changes, I
cannot just look at test code and see if it works.
- I will have no way to test its correctness after it's committed.
For you, the work ends when your patch is accepted. For me, that's when
the work begins, and I need to make sure that the patch will be
maintainable in the future.
Thanks, and sorry again for the delay.
Paolo
