Markus Armbruster wrote:
> As far as OProfile is concerned: we can make it work with whatever
> kind of virtual PMU we want, without a complete CPU fake. It just
> needs to be able to detect our virtual PMU.
>
>
Well, if the virtual PMU happens to match exactly the physical
architectural PMU,
[Note cc: Will, who knows much more about OProfile than I do]
Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>
>>> Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>>
System-wide profiling of the *virtual* machine is related to profiling
Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>> Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>
>>> System-wide profiling of the *virtual* machine is related to profiling
>>> just a process. That's hard. I guess building on Perfmon2 would make
>>> sense there, but as long as it's out
On Thursday 31 January 2008 08:42:32 am Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:44:10AM +0530, Balaji Rao wrote:
> > On Wednesday 30 January 2008 11:56:25 pm Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > There is no really an architectural PMU if you consider
> > > boxes beyond relatively new Intel CPUs (which go
> Sure it could, but that would be a new interface. If you were
> free to define a new interface you could also just go completely
> hypercall based.
Actually thinking about it more it would be probably possible for
KVM to emulate ArchPerfMon on AMD and Family 15 Intel based on
the local PMU.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 12:44:10AM +0530, Balaji Rao wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 January 2008 11:56:25 pm Andi Kleen wrote:
> > There is no really an architectural PMU if you consider
> > boxes beyond relatively new Intel CPUs (which got one)
> >
> But since kvm runs only on such CPUs, it should not r
Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>
>> System-wide profiling of the *virtual* machine is related to profiling
>> just a process. That's hard. I guess building on Perfmon2 would make
>> sense there, but as long as it's out of tree... Can we wait for it?
>> If not
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 11:56:25 pm Andi Kleen wrote:
> There is no really an architectural PMU if you consider
> boxes beyond relatively new Intel CPUs (which got one)
>
But since kvm runs only on such CPUs, it should not really be a problem in
migrating between various Intel models at least
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 11:44:39 pm Avi Kivity wrote:
> Balaji Rao wrote:
> > But don't the architectural performance counters vary between Intel and
> > AMD cpus ? AFAIK, they do. And, this would pose problems during migration
> > between Intel and AMD hosts.
>
> The also vary between Intel h
> Balaji Rao wrote:
>> On Wednesday 30 January 2008 11:11:51 pm Avi Kivity wrote:
>>
>>> Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>>
System-wide profiling of the *virtual* machine is related to profiling
just a process. That's hard. I guess building on Perfmon2 would make
sense there, bu
Balaji Rao wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 January 2008 11:11:51 pm Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>
>>> System-wide profiling of the *virtual* machine is related to profiling
>>> just a process. That's hard. I guess building on Perfmon2 would make
>>> sense there, but as long
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 11:11:51 pm Avi Kivity wrote:
> Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > System-wide profiling of the *virtual* machine is related to profiling
> > just a process. That's hard. I guess building on Perfmon2 would make
> > sense there, but as long as it's out of tree... Can we wai
> Is there really a requirement to profile several userspace programs, on
> several guests, simultaneously?
Since guests affect each others performance (e.g. one guest can push
the data of another guest out of cache) profiling over guests makes
a lot of sense. Otherwise you cannot easily diagno
Markus Armbruster wrote:
>
> System-wide profiling of the *virtual* machine is related to profiling
> just a process. That's hard. I guess building on Perfmon2 would make
> sense there, but as long as it's out of tree... Can we wait for it?
> If not, what then?
>
>
Give the guest access to t
14 matches
Mail list logo
