On 02/26/2010 05:55 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 17:11 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/26/2010 05:08 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
That's 7 more than what we support now, and 7 more than what we can
guarantee without it.
Again, what windows software uses only those 7? Does it pay to only have
access to those 7 or does it limit the usability to exactly the same
subset a paravirt interface would?
Good question. Would be interesting to try out VTune with the non-arch
pmu masked out.
Also, the ANY bit is part of the intel arch pmu, but you still have to
mask it out.
BTW, just wondering, why would a developer be running VTune in a guest
anyway? I'd think that a developer that windows oriented would simply
run windows on his desktop and VTune there.
What if you want to run on 10 different variations of Windows 32 / 64 /
server / desktop configurations. Do you maintain 10 installed pieces of
hardware?
A virtual machine is a better solution. And you might want to
performance tune all 10 of those configurations as well. Be nice if it
were possible.
--
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
