On 11/27/19 10:44 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 27.11.2019 13:00, Paul Durrant wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/vpmu.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/vpmu.c >> @@ -479,6 +479,8 @@ static int vpmu_arch_initialise(struct vcpu *v) >> >> if ( ret ) >> printk(XENLOG_G_WARNING "VPMU: Initialization failed for %pv\n", v); >> + else >> + vpmu_set(vpmu, VPMU_CONTEXT_ALLOCATED);
That won't work I think. On Intel the context is allocated lazily for HVM/PVH guests during the first MSR access. For example: core2_vpmu_do_wrmsr() -> core2_vpmu_msr_common_check()): if ( unlikely(!vpmu_is_set(vpmu, VPMU_CONTEXT_ALLOCATED)) && !core2_vpmu_alloc_resource(current) ) return 0; For PV guests the context *is* allocated from vmx_vpmu_initialise(). I don't remember why only PV does eager allocation but I think doing it for all guests would make code much simpler and then this patch will be correct. -boris >> >> return ret; >> } >> @@ -576,11 +578,36 @@ static void vpmu_arch_destroy(struct vcpu *v) >> >> vpmu->arch_vpmu_ops->arch_vpmu_destroy(v); >> } >> + >> + vpmu_reset(vpmu, VPMU_CONTEXT_ALLOCATED); >> } > Boris, > > I'd like to ask that you comment on this part of the change at > least, as I seem to vaguely recall that things were intentionally > not done this way originally. > > Paul, > > everything else looks god to me now. > > Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
