On 2021/1/29 10:52, Liuxiangdong (Aven, Cloud Infrastructure Service
Product Dept.) wrote:
On 2021/1/26 15:08, Xu, Like wrote:
On 2021/1/25 22:47, Liuxiangdong (Aven, Cloud Infrastructure Service
Product Dept.) wrote:
Thanks for replying,
On 2021/1/25 10:41, Like Xu wrote:
+
On 2021/1/26 15:08, Xu, Like wrote:
On 2021/1/25 22:47, Liuxiangdong (Aven, Cloud Infrastructure Service
Product Dept.) wrote:
Thanks for replying,
On 2021/1/25 10:41, Like Xu wrote:
+ k...@vger.kernel.org
Hi Liuxiangdong,
On 2021/1/22 18:02, Liuxiangdong (Aven, Cloud Infrastructure
On 2021/1/25 22:47, Liuxiangdong (Aven, Cloud Infrastructure Service
Product Dept.) wrote:
Thanks for replying,
On 2021/1/25 10:41, Like Xu wrote:
+ k...@vger.kernel.org
Hi Liuxiangdong,
On 2021/1/22 18:02, Liuxiangdong (Aven, Cloud Infrastructure Service
Product Dept.) wrote:
Hi Like,
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 04:08:22PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 2021/1/22 17:56, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:51:38AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > > I'm asking about ucode/hardare. Is the "guest pebs
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 08:07:06PM +0800, Xu, Like wrote:
> So under the premise that counter cross-mapping is allowed,
> how can hypercall help fix it ?
Hypercall or otherwise exposing the mapping, will let the guest fix it
up when it already touches the data. Which avoids the host from having
On 2021/1/25 20:18, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 08:07:06PM +0800, Xu, Like wrote:
So under the premise that counter cross-mapping is allowed,
how can hypercall help fix it ?
Hypercall or otherwise exposing the mapping, will let the guest fix it
up when it already touches the
Thanks for replying,
On 2021/1/25 10:41, Like Xu wrote:
+ k...@vger.kernel.org
Hi Liuxiangdong,
On 2021/1/22 18:02, Liuxiangdong (Aven, Cloud Infrastructure Service
Product Dept.) wrote:
Hi Like,
Some questions about
On 2021/1/25 19:13, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 04:08:22PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
Hi Peter,
On 2021/1/22 17:56, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:51:38AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021, Andi Kleen wrote:
I'm asking about ucode/hardare.
Hi Peter,
On 2021/1/22 17:56, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:51:38AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021, Andi Kleen wrote:
I'm asking about ucode/hardare. Is the "guest pebs buffer write -> PEBS PMI"
guaranteed to be atomic?
Of course not.
So there's
+ k...@vger.kernel.org
Hi Liuxiangdong,
On 2021/1/22 18:02, Liuxiangdong (Aven, Cloud Infrastructure Service
Product Dept.) wrote:
Hi Like,
Some questions about
https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20210104131542.495413-1-like...@linux.intel.com/
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:51:38AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > I'm asking about ucode/hardare. Is the "guest pebs buffer write -> PEBS
> > > PMI"
> > > guaranteed to be atomic?
> >
> > Of course not.
>
> So there's still a window where the
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:51:38AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > I'm asking about ucode/hardare. Is the "guest pebs buffer write -> PEBS
> > > PMI"
> > > guaranteed to be atomic?
> >
> > Of course not.
>
> So there's still a window where the
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I'm asking about ucode/hardare. Is the "guest pebs buffer write -> PEBS
> > PMI"
> > guaranteed to be atomic?
>
> Of course not.
So there's still a window where the guest could observe the bad counter index,
correct?
> I'm asking about ucode/hardare. Is the "guest pebs buffer write -> PEBS PMI"
> guaranteed to be atomic?
Of course not.
>
> In practice, under what scenarios will guest counters get cross-mapped? And,
> how does this support affect guest accuracy? I.e. how bad do things get for
> the
>
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021, Xu, Like wrote:
> Hi Sean,
>
> Thanks for your comments !
>
> On 2021/1/15 3:10, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021, Like Xu wrote:
> > > 2) Slow path (part 3, patch 0012-0017)
> > >
> > > This is when the host assigned physical PMC has a different index
>
Hi Sean,
Thanks for your comments !
On 2021/1/15 3:10, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021, Like Xu wrote:
2) Slow path (part 3, patch 0012-0017)
This is when the host assigned physical PMC has a different index
from the virtual PMC (e.g. using physical PMC1 to emulate virtual
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021, Like Xu wrote:
> 2) Slow path (part 3, patch 0012-0017)
>
> This is when the host assigned physical PMC has a different index
> from the virtual PMC (e.g. using physical PMC1 to emulate virtual PMC0)
> In this case, KVM needs to rewrite the PEBS records to change the
>
The Precise Event Based Sampling (PEBS) facility on Intel Ice Lake Server
platforms can provide an architectural state of the instruction executed
after the guest instruction that caused the event. This patch set enables
the PEBS via DS feature for KVM guests on the Ice Lake Server.
We can use
18 matches
Mail list logo
