On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:46:34AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 02/26/2010 10:42 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> Note that the 'soft PMU' still sucks from a design POV as there's no generic >> hw interface to the PMU. So there would have to be a 'soft AMD' and a 'soft >> Intel' PMU driver at minimum. >> > > Right, this will severely limit migration domains to hosts of the same > vendor and processor generation. There is a middle ground, though, > Intel has recently moved to define an "architectural pmu" which is not > model specific. I don't know if AMD adopted it. We could offer both > options - native host capabilities, with a loss of compatibility, and > the architectural pmu, with loss of model specific counters. I only had a quick look yet on the architectural pmu from intel but it looks like it can be emulated for a guest on amd using existing features. Joerg -- 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
