On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 5:45 AM Like Xu <like.xu.linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 6/9/2022 2:00 am, Jim Mattson wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 5:44 AM Like Xu <like.xu.linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> From: Like Xu <likexu@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> If AMD Performance Monitoring Version 2 (PerfMonV2) is detected > >> by the guest, it can use a new scheme to manage the Core PMCs using > >> the new global control and status registers. > >> > >> In addition to benefiting from the PerfMonV2 functionality in the same > >> way as the host (higher precision), the guest also can reduce the number > >> of vm-exits by lowering the total number of MSRs accesses. > >> > >> In terms of implementation details, amd_is_valid_msr() is resurrected > >> since three newly added MSRs could not be mapped to one vPMC. > >> The possibility of emulating PerfMonV2 on the mainframe has also > >> been eliminated for reasons of precision. > >> > >> Co-developed-by: Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@xxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@xxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Like Xu <likexu@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c | 6 +++++ > >> arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > >> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 11 ++++++++++ > >> 3 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c > >> index 7002e1b74108..56b4f898a246 100644 > >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c > >> @@ -455,12 +455,15 @@ int kvm_pmu_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) > >> > >> switch (msr) { > >> case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS: > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_STATUS: > >> msr_info->data = pmu->global_status; > >> return 0; > >> case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL: > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_CTL: > >> msr_info->data = pmu->global_ctrl; > >> return 0; > >> case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_OVF_CTRL: > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_STATUS_CLR: > >> msr_info->data = 0; > >> return 0; > >> default: > >> @@ -479,12 +482,14 @@ int kvm_pmu_set_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) > >> > >> switch (msr) { > >> case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS: > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_STATUS: > >> if (msr_info->host_initiated) { > >> pmu->global_status = data; > >> return 0; > >> } > >> break; /* RO MSR */ > >> case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL: > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_CTL: > >> if (pmu->global_ctrl == data) > >> return 0; > >> if (kvm_valid_perf_global_ctrl(pmu, data)) { > >> @@ -495,6 +500,7 @@ int kvm_pmu_set_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) > >> } > >> break; > >> case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_OVF_CTRL: > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_STATUS_CLR: > >> if (!(data & pmu->global_ovf_ctrl_mask)) { > >> if (!msr_info->host_initiated) > >> pmu->global_status &= ~data; > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c > >> index 3a20972e9f1a..4c7d408e3caa 100644 > >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/pmu.c > >> @@ -92,12 +92,6 @@ static struct kvm_pmc *amd_rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > >> return amd_pmc_idx_to_pmc(vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu), idx & ~(3u << 30)); > >> } > >> > >> -static bool amd_is_valid_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr) > >> -{ > >> - /* All MSRs refer to exactly one PMC, so msr_idx_to_pmc is enough. */ > >> - return false; > >> -} > >> - > >> static struct kvm_pmc *amd_msr_idx_to_pmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr) > >> { > >> struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); > >> @@ -109,6 +103,29 @@ static struct kvm_pmc *amd_msr_idx_to_pmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr) > >> return pmc; > >> } > >> > >> +static bool amd_is_valid_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr) > >> +{ > >> + struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); > >> + > >> + switch (msr) { > >> + case MSR_K7_EVNTSEL0 ... MSR_K7_PERFCTR3: > >> + return pmu->version > 0; > >> + case MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0 ... MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR5: > >> + return guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE); > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_STATUS: > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_CTL: > >> + case MSR_AMD64_PERF_CNTR_GLOBAL_STATUS_CLR: > >> + return pmu->version > 1; > >> + default: > >> + if (msr > MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR5 && > >> + msr < MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0 + 2 * KVM_AMD_PMC_MAX_GENERIC) > >> + return pmu->version > 1; > > > > Should this be bounded by guest CPUID.80000022H:EBX[NumCorePmc] > > (unless host-initiated)? > > Indeed, how about: > > default: > if (msr > MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR5 && > msr < MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0 + 2 * pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters) > return pmu->version > 1; > > and for host-initiated: > > #define MSR_F15H_PERF_MSR_MAX \ > (MSR_F15H_PERF_CTR0 + 2 * (KVM_AMD_PMC_MAX_GENERIC - 1)) I think there may be an off-by-one error here. > > kvm_{set|get}_msr_common() > case MSR_F15H_PERF_CTL0 ... MSR_F15H_PERF_MSR_MAX: > if (kvm_pmu_is_valid_msr(vcpu, msr)) > return kvm_pmu_set_msr(vcpu, msr_info); > ? > > > > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + > >> + return amd_msr_idx_to_pmc(vcpu, msr); > >> +} > >> + > >> static int amd_pmu_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) > >> { > >> struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); > >> @@ -162,20 +179,31 @@ static int amd_pmu_set_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) > >> static void amd_pmu_refresh(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > >> { > >> struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); > >> + struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *entry; > >> + union cpuid_0x80000022_ebx ebx; > >> > >> - if (guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE)) > >> + pmu->version = 1; > >> + entry = kvm_find_cpuid_entry_index(vcpu, 0x80000022, 0); > >> + if (kvm_pmu_cap.version > 1 && entry && (entry->eax & BIT(0))) { > >> + pmu->version = 2; > >> + ebx.full = entry->ebx; > >> + pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters = min3((unsigned int)ebx.split.num_core_pmc, > >> + (unsigned int)kvm_pmu_cap.num_counters_gp, > >> + (unsigned int)KVM_AMD_PMC_MAX_GENERIC); > >> + pmu->global_ctrl_mask = ~((1ull << pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters) - 1); > >> + pmu->global_ovf_ctrl_mask = pmu->global_ctrl_mask; > >> + } else if (guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE)) { > >> pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters = AMD64_NUM_COUNTERS_CORE; > > > > The logic above doesn't seem quite right, since guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, > > X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE) promises 6 PMCs, regardless of what > > CPUID.80000022 says. > > I would have expected the appearance of CPUID.80000022 to override PERFCTR_CORE, > now I don't think it's a good idea as you do, so how about: > > amd_pmu_refresh(): > > bool perfctr_core = guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE); > > pmu->version = 1; > if (kvm_pmu_cap.version > 1) > entry = kvm_find_cpuid_entry_index(vcpu, 0x80000022, 0); > > if (!perfctr_core) > pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters = AMD64_NUM_COUNTERS; > if (entry && (entry->eax & BIT(0))) { > pmu->version = 2; > ebx.full = entry->ebx; > pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters = min3((unsigned int)ebx.split.num_core_pmc, > (unsigned int)kvm_pmu_cap.num_counters_gp, > (unsigned int)KVM_AMD_PMC_MAX_GENERIC); > } > /* PERFCTR_CORE promises 6 PMCs, regardless of CPUID.80000022 */ > if (perfctr_core) { > pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters = max(pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters, > AMD64_NUM_COUNTERS_CORE); > } Even if X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE is clear, all AMD CPUs promise 4 PMCs. > > if (pmu->version > 1) { > pmu->global_ctrl_mask = ~((1ull << pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters) - 1); > pmu->global_ovf_ctrl_mask = pmu->global_ctrl_mask; > } > > ? > >