On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 04:38:17PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 05/12/2011 04:06 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: >> AMD processors don't implement that cpuid leaf. > > Right. But if an AMD processor were to implement that leaf, it would be > in a compatible manner, yes? No official statement, but I guess this is the case. I have to check back, though. > A paravirt PMU also has to be implemented on top of perf_events. > Otherwise we can't share this resource. So the only question is what > the interface looks like. The arch pmu is non-optimized, but well > specified and somewhat supported in guests. A paravirt pmu is not so > well specified at this point but can be faster (less exits). I agree that getting the interface right is certainly the most difficult and important task here. 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
