* Joerg Roedel <joro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 09:39:04AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > What do you mean by software events? > > > > Things like: > > > > aldebaran:~> perf stat -a sleep 1 > > > > Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': > > > > 15995.719133 task-clock-msecs # 15.981 CPUs > > 5787 context-switches # 0.000 M/sec > > 210 CPU-migrations # 0.000 M/sec > > 193909 page-faults # 0.012 M/sec > > 28704833507 cycles # 1794.532 M/sec (scaled from 78.69%) > > 14387445668 instructions # 0.501 IPC (scaled from 90.71%) > > 736644616 branches # 46.053 M/sec (scaled from 90.52%) > > 695884659 branch-misses # 94.467 % (scaled from 90.70%) > > 727070678 cache-references # 45.454 M/sec (scaled from 88.11%) > > 1305560420 cache-misses # 81.619 M/sec (scaled from 52.00%) > > > > 1.000942399 seconds time elapsed > > > > These lines: > > > > 15995.719133 task-clock-msecs # 15.981 CPUs > > 5787 context-switches # 0.000 M/sec > > 210 CPU-migrations # 0.000 M/sec > > 193909 page-faults # 0.012 M/sec > > > > Are software events of the host - a subset of which could be transparently > > exposed to the guest. Same for tracepoints, probes, etc. Those are not exposed > > by the hardware PMU. So by doing a 'soft' PMU (or even better: a paravirt > > channel to perf events) we gain a lot more than just raw PMU functionality. > > > > 'performance events' are about a lot more than just the PMU, it's a coherent > > system health / system events / structured logging framework. > > Yeah I know. But these event should be available in the guest already, no? > [...] How would an old Linux or Windows guest know about them? Also, even for new-Linux guests, they'd only have access to their own internal events - not to any host events. My suggestion (admittedly not explained in any detail) was to allow guest access to certain _host_ events. I.e. a guest could profile its own impact on the host (such as VM exits, IO done on the host side, scheduling, etc.), without it having any (other) privileged access to the host. This would be a powerful concept: you could profile your guest for host efficiency, _without_ having access to the host - beyond those events themselves. (which would be set up in a carefully filtered-to-guest manner.) > [...] They don't need any kind of hardware support from the pmu. A paravirt > perf channel from the guest to the host would be definitly a win. It would > be a powerful tool for kvm/linux-guest analysis (e.g. trace host-kvm and > guest-events together on the host) Yeah. Ingo -- 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
