Re: [PATCH 8/9] KVM, VMX: Add support for guest/host-only profiling

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 10/03/2011 05:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 05:00:25PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>  On 10/03/2011 03:49 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>  >Support guest/host-only profiling by switch perf msrs on
>  >a guest entry if needed.
>  >
>  >@@ -6052,6 +6056,26 @@ static void vmx_cancel_injection(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  >   	vmcs_write32(VM_ENTRY_INTR_INFO_FIELD, 0);
>  >   }
>  >
>  >+static void atomic_switch_perf_msrs(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>  >+{
>  >+#ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
>
>  No need for #ifdef (if you also define perf_guest_get_msrs() when
>  !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS).
>
Yes, but will compiler be smart enough to remove the code of the
function completely? It will have to figure that vmx->perf_msrs_cnt is
always 0 somehow.

It won't, but do we care?

>  >
>  >+
>  >+	perf_guest_get_msrs(vmx->perf_msrs_cnt, vmx->perf_msrs);
>  >+	for (i = 0; i<   vmx->perf_msrs_cnt; i++) {
>  >+		struct perf_guest_switch_msr *msr =&vmx->perf_msrs[i];
>  >+		if (msr->host == msr->guest)
>  >+			clear_atomic_switch_msr(vmx, msr->msr);
>  >+		else
>  >+			add_atomic_switch_msr(vmx, msr->msr, msr->guest,
>  >+					msr->host);
>
>  This generates a lot of VMWRITEs even if nothing changes, just to
>  re-set bits in the VMCS to their existing values.  Need to add
>  something like this:
>
>     if (loaded_vmcs->msr[i].host == msr->host
>  &&  loaded_vmcs->msr[i].guest == msr->guest)
>            continue;
VMWRITE happens only when number of autoloaded MSRs changes (which is
rare), not on each call to add_atomic_switch_msr(). I thought about
optimizing this write too by doing
vmcs_write32(VM_(ENTRY|EXIT)_MSR_LOAD_COUNT, m->nr) only once by
checking that  m->nr changed during vmentry. Can be done later.

For EFER and PERF_CTRL, it's done unconditionally, no?

>
>  btw, shouldn't the msr autoload list be part of loaded_vmcs as well?
>
Why?

Any caching is only relative to the vmcs (unless we invalidate the cache on vmcs switch).

>
>  Do we really need a private buffer?  Perhaps perf_guest_get_msrs()
>  can return a perf-internal buffer (but then, we will need to copy it
>  for the optimization above, but that's a separate issue).
>
The buffer will be small, so IMHO private one is not an issue. We can
make it perf internal per cpu buffer I think.


I think the API is nicer with perf returning a read-only internal buffer; this way there is no kmalloc involved since perf knows its internal limits.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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


[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux