On Sun, Dec 22, 2024 at 07:32:29PM +0530, Vaibhav Jain wrote: > Update kvm-nested APIv2 documentation to include five new > Guest-State-Elements to fetch the hostwide counters. These counters are > per L1-Lpar and indicate the amount of Heap/Page-table memory allocated, > available and Page-table memory reclaimed for all L2-Guests active > instances > > Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/arch/powerpc/kvm-nested.rst | 40 ++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/arch/powerpc/kvm-nested.rst b/Documentation/arch/powerpc/kvm-nested.rst > index 5defd13cc6c1..c506192f3f98 100644 > --- a/Documentation/arch/powerpc/kvm-nested.rst > +++ b/Documentation/arch/powerpc/kvm-nested.rst > @@ -208,13 +208,9 @@ associated values for each ID in the GSB:: > flags: > Bit 0: getGuestWideState: Request state of the Guest instead > of an individual VCPU. > - Bit 1: takeOwnershipOfVcpuState Indicate the L1 is taking > - over ownership of the VCPU state and that the L0 can free > - the storage holding the state. The VCPU state will need to > - be returned to the Hypervisor via H_GUEST_SET_STATE prior > - to H_GUEST_RUN_VCPU being called for this VCPU. The data > - returned in the dataBuffer is in a Hypervisor internal > - format. > + Bit 1: getHostWideState: Request stats of the Host. This causes > + the guestId and vcpuId parameters to be ignored and attempting > + to get the VCPU/Guest state will cause an error. s/Request stats/Request state > Bits 2-63: Reserved > guestId: ID obtained from H_GUEST_CREATE > vcpuId: ID of the vCPU pass to H_GUEST_CREATE_VCPU > @@ -402,13 +398,14 @@ GSB element: > > The ID in the GSB element specifies what is to be set. This includes > archtected state like GPRs, VSRs, SPRs, plus also some meta data about > -the partition like the timebase offset and partition scoped page > +the partition and like the timebase offset and partition scoped page > table information. The statement that is already there looks correct IMO. > > +--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > -| ID | Size | RW | Thread | Details | > -| | Bytes | | Guest | | > -| | | | Scope | | > +| ID | Size | RW |(H)ost | Details | > +| | Bytes | |(G)uest | | > +| | | |(T)hread| | > +| | | |Scope | | > +========+=======+====+========+==================================+ > | 0x0000 | | RW | TG | NOP element | > +--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > @@ -434,6 +431,27 @@ table information. > | | | | |- 0x8 Table size. | > +--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > | 0x0007-| | | | Reserved | > +| 0x07FF | | | | | > ++--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > +| 0x0800 | 0x08 | R | H | Current usage in bytes of the | > +| | | | | L0's Guest Management Space | > ++--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > +| 0x0801 | 0x08 | R | H | Max bytes available in the | > +| | | | | L0's Guest Management Space | > ++--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > +| 0x0802 | 0x08 | R | H | Current usage in bytes of the | > +| | | | | L0's Guest Page Table Management | > +| | | | | Space | > ++--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > +| 0x0803 | 0x08 | R | H | Max bytes available in the L0's | > +| | | | | Guest Page Table Management | > +| | | | | Space | > ++--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > +| 0x0804 | 0x08 | R | H | Amount of reclaimed L0 Guest's | > +| | | | | Page Table Management Space due | > +| | | | | to overcommit | I think it would be more clear to specify "... Management space for L1 ..." in the details of all above entries. > ++--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > +| 0x0805-| | | | Reserved | > | 0x0BFF | | | | | > +--------+-------+----+--------+----------------------------------+ > | 0x0C00 | 0x10 | RW | T |Run vCPU Input Buffer: | > -- Also, the row 2 of this table mentions the 'takeOwnershipOfVcpuState' flag which is no longer supported. You can remove that as well. > 2.47.1 >
