Hello,
On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 11:40:51AM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote:
>
>
> On 2024-09-06 6:59 a.m., Mi, Dapeng wrote:
> >
> > On 8/1/2024 12:58 PM, Mingwei Zhang wrote:
> >> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> Currently, the guest and host share the PMU resources when a guest is
> >> running. KVM has to create an extra virtual event to simulate the
> >> guest's event, which brings several issues, e.g., high overhead, not
> >> accuracy and etc.
> >>
> >> A new passthrough PMU method is proposed to address the issue. It requires
> >> that the PMU resources can be fully occupied by the guest while it's
> >> running. Two new interfaces are implemented to fulfill the requirement.
> >> The hypervisor should invoke the interface while creating a guest which
> >> wants the passthrough PMU capability.
> >>
> >> The PMU resources should only be temporarily occupied as a whole when a
> >> guest is running. When the guest is out, the PMU resources are still
> >> shared among different users.
> >>
> >> The exclude_guest event modifier is used to guarantee the exclusive
> >> occupation of the PMU resources. When creating a guest, the hypervisor
> >> should check whether there are !exclude_guest events in the system.
> >> If yes, the creation should fail. Because some PMU resources have been
> >> occupied by other users.
> >> If no, the PMU resources can be safely accessed by the guest directly.
> >> Perf guarantees that no new !exclude_guest events are created when a
> >> guest is running.
> >>
> >> Only the passthrough PMU is affected, but not for other PMU e.g., uncore
> >> and SW PMU. The behavior of those PMUs are not changed. The guest
> >> enter/exit interfaces should only impact the supported PMUs.
> >> Add a new PERF_PMU_CAP_PASSTHROUGH_VPMU flag to indicate the PMUs that
> >> support the feature.
> >>
> >> Add nr_include_guest_events to track the !exclude_guest events of PMU
> >> with PERF_PMU_CAP_PASSTHROUGH_VPMU.
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Tested-by: Yongwei Ma <yongwei.ma@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> include/linux/perf_event.h | 10 ++++++
> >> kernel/events/core.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 2 files changed, 76 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> >> index a5304ae8c654..45d1ea82aa21 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> >> @@ -291,6 +291,7 @@ struct perf_event_pmu_context;
> >> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_EXCLUDE 0x0040
> >> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_AUX_OUTPUT 0x0080
> >> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_EXTENDED_HW_TYPE 0x0100
> >> +#define PERF_PMU_CAP_PASSTHROUGH_VPMU 0x0200
> >>
> >> struct perf_output_handle;
> >>
> >> @@ -1728,6 +1729,8 @@ extern void perf_event_task_tick(void);
> >> extern int perf_event_account_interrupt(struct perf_event *event);
> >> extern int perf_event_period(struct perf_event *event, u64 value);
> >> extern u64 perf_event_pause(struct perf_event *event, bool reset);
> >> +int perf_get_mediated_pmu(void);
> >> +void perf_put_mediated_pmu(void);
> >> #else /* !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS: */
> >> static inline void *
> >> perf_aux_output_begin(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
> >> @@ -1814,6 +1817,13 @@ static inline u64 perf_event_pause(struct perf_event *event, bool reset)
> >> {
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >> +
> >> +static inline int perf_get_mediated_pmu(void)
> >> +{
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static inline void perf_put_mediated_pmu(void) { }
> >> #endif
> >>
> >> #if defined(CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS) && defined(CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL)
> >> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> >> index 8f908f077935..45868d276cde 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> >> @@ -402,6 +402,20 @@ static atomic_t nr_bpf_events __read_mostly;
> >> static atomic_t nr_cgroup_events __read_mostly;
> >> static atomic_t nr_text_poke_events __read_mostly;
> >> static atomic_t nr_build_id_events __read_mostly;
> >> +static atomic_t nr_include_guest_events __read_mostly;
> >> +
> >> +static atomic_t nr_mediated_pmu_vms;
> >> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(perf_mediated_pmu_mutex);
> >> +
> >> +/* !exclude_guest event of PMU with PERF_PMU_CAP_PASSTHROUGH_VPMU */
> >> +static inline bool is_include_guest_event(struct perf_event *event)
> >> +{
> >> + if ((event->pmu->capabilities & PERF_PMU_CAP_PASSTHROUGH_VPMU) &&
> >> + !event->attr.exclude_guest)
> >> + return true;
> >> +
> >> + return false;
> >> +}
> >>
> >> static LIST_HEAD(pmus);
> >> static DEFINE_MUTEX(pmus_lock);
> >> @@ -5212,6 +5226,9 @@ static void _free_event(struct perf_event *event)
> >>
> >> unaccount_event(event);
> >>
> >> + if (is_include_guest_event(event))
> >> + atomic_dec(&nr_include_guest_events);
> >> +
> >> security_perf_event_free(event);
> >>
> >> if (event->rb) {
> >> @@ -5769,6 +5786,36 @@ u64 perf_event_pause(struct perf_event *event, bool reset)
> >> }
> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(perf_event_pause);
> >>
> >> +/*
> >> + * Currently invoked at VM creation to
> >> + * - Check whether there are existing !exclude_guest events of PMU with
> >> + * PERF_PMU_CAP_PASSTHROUGH_VPMU
> >> + * - Set nr_mediated_pmu_vms to prevent !exclude_guest event creation on
> >> + * PMUs with PERF_PMU_CAP_PASSTHROUGH_VPMU
> >> + *
> >> + * No impact for the PMU without PERF_PMU_CAP_PASSTHROUGH_VPMU. The perf
> >> + * still owns all the PMU resources.
> >> + */
> >> +int perf_get_mediated_pmu(void)
> >> +{
> >> + guard(mutex)(&perf_mediated_pmu_mutex);
> >> + if (atomic_inc_not_zero(&nr_mediated_pmu_vms))
> >> + return 0;
> >> +
> >> + if (atomic_read(&nr_include_guest_events))
> >> + return -EBUSY;
> >> +
> >> + atomic_inc(&nr_mediated_pmu_vms);
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(perf_get_mediated_pmu);
> >> +
> >> +void perf_put_mediated_pmu(void)
> >> +{
> >> + atomic_dec(&nr_mediated_pmu_vms);
> >> +}
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(perf_put_mediated_pmu);
> >> +
> >> /*
> >> * Holding the top-level event's child_mutex means that any
> >> * descendant process that has inherited this event will block
> >> @@ -11907,6 +11954,17 @@ static void account_event(struct perf_event *event)
> >> account_pmu_sb_event(event);
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static int perf_account_include_guest_event(void)
> >> +{
> >> + guard(mutex)(&perf_mediated_pmu_mutex);
> >> +
> >> + if (atomic_read(&nr_mediated_pmu_vms))
> >> + return -EACCES;
> >
> > Kan, Namhyung posted a patchset
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240904064131.2377873-1-namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > which would remove to set exclude_guest flag from perf tools by default.
> > This may impact current mediated vPMU solution, but fortunately the
> > patchset provides a fallback mechanism to add exclude_guest flag if kernel
> > returns "EOPNOTSUPP".
> >
> > So we'd better return "EOPNOTSUPP" instead of "EACCES" here. BTW, returning
> > "EOPNOTSUPP" here looks more reasonable than "EACCES".
>
> It seems the existing Apple M1 PMU has ready returned "EOPNOTSUPP" for
> the !exclude_guest. Yes, we should use the same error code.
Yep, it'd be much easier to handle if it returns the same error code.
Thanks,
Namhyung
