From: maobibo <maobibo@loongson.cn>
To: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
Cc: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Xiong Zhang <xiong.y.zhang@linux.intel.com>,
pbonzini@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, kan.liang@intel.com,
zhenyuw@linux.intel.com, jmattson@google.com,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhiyuan.lv@intel.com,
eranian@google.com, irogers@google.com, samantha.alt@intel.com,
like.xu.linux@gmail.com, chao.gao@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 23/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Implement the save/restore of PMU state for Intel CPU
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 14:08:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86d1f6d1-197a-ecd9-3349-a64da9ea9789@loongson.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL715WJK893gQd1m9CCAjz5OkxsRc5C4ZR7yJWJXbaGvCeZxQA@mail.gmail.com>
On 2024/4/23 下午12:23, Mingwei Zhang wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 8:55 PM maobibo <maobibo@loongson.cn> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2024/4/23 上午11:13, Mi, Dapeng wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4/23/2024 10:53 AM, maobibo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2024/4/23 上午10:44, Mi, Dapeng wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/23/2024 9:01 AM, maobibo wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2024/4/23 上午1:01, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024, maobibo wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024/4/16 上午6:45, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024, Mingwei Zhang wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 10:38 AM Sean Christopherson
>>>>>>>>>> <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> One my biggest complaints with the current vPMU code is that
>>>>>>>>>>> the roles and
>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities between KVM and perf are poorly defined, which
>>>>>>>>>>> leads to suboptimal
>>>>>>>>>>> and hard to maintain code.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Case in point, I'm pretty sure leaving guest values in PMCs
>>>>>>>>>>> _would_ leak guest
>>>>>>>>>>> state to userspace processes that have RDPMC permissions, as
>>>>>>>>>>> the PMCs might not
>>>>>>>>>>> be dirty from perf's perspective (see
>>>>>>>>>>> perf_clear_dirty_counters()).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Blindly clearing PMCs in KVM "solves" that problem, but in
>>>>>>>>>>> doing so makes the
>>>>>>>>>>> overall code brittle because it's not clear whether KVM _needs_
>>>>>>>>>>> to clear PMCs,
>>>>>>>>>>> or if KVM is just being paranoid.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So once this rolls out, perf and vPMU are clients directly to
>>>>>>>>>> PMU HW.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't think this is a statement we want to make, as it opens a
>>>>>>>>> discussion
>>>>>>>>> that we won't win. Nor do I think it's one we *need* to make.
>>>>>>>>> KVM doesn't need
>>>>>>>>> to be on equal footing with perf in terms of owning/managing PMU
>>>>>>>>> hardware, KVM
>>>>>>>>> just needs a few APIs to allow faithfully and accurately
>>>>>>>>> virtualizing a guest PMU.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Faithful cleaning (blind cleaning) has to be the baseline
>>>>>>>>>> implementation, until both clients agree to a "deal" between them.
>>>>>>>>>> Currently, there is no such deal, but I believe we could have
>>>>>>>>>> one via
>>>>>>>>>> future discussion.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What I am saying is that there needs to be a "deal" in place
>>>>>>>>> before this code
>>>>>>>>> is merged. It doesn't need to be anything fancy, e.g. perf can
>>>>>>>>> still pave over
>>>>>>>>> PMCs it doesn't immediately load, as opposed to using
>>>>>>>>> cpu_hw_events.dirty to lazily
>>>>>>>>> do the clearing. But perf and KVM need to work together from the
>>>>>>>>> get go, ie. I
>>>>>>>>> don't want KVM doing something without regard to what perf does,
>>>>>>>>> and vice versa.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is similar issue on LoongArch vPMU where vm can directly pmu
>>>>>>>> hardware
>>>>>>>> and pmu hw is shard with guest and host. Besides context switch
>>>>>>>> there are
>>>>>>>> other places where perf core will access pmu hw, such as tick
>>>>>>>> timer/hrtimer/ipi function call, and KVM can only intercept
>>>>>>>> context switch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Two questions:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Can KVM prevent the guest from accessing the PMU?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) If so, KVM can grant partial access to the PMU, or is it all
>>>>>>> or nothing?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the answer to both questions is "yes", then it sounds like
>>>>>>> LoongArch *requires*
>>>>>>> mediated/passthrough support in order to virtualize its PMU.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Sean,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank for your quick response.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> yes, kvm can prevent guest from accessing the PMU and grant partial
>>>>>> or all to access to the PMU. Only that if one pmu event is granted
>>>>>> to VM, host can not access this pmu event again. There must be pmu
>>>>>> event switch if host want to.
>>>>>
>>>>> PMU event is a software entity which won't be shared. did you mean if
>>>>> a PMU HW counter is granted to VM, then Host can't access the PMU HW
>>>>> counter, right?
>>>> yes, if PMU HW counter/control is granted to VM. The value comes from
>>>> guest, and is not meaningful for host. Host pmu core does not know
>>>> that it is granted to VM, host still think that it owns pmu.
>>>
>>> That's one issue this patchset tries to solve. Current new mediated x86
>>> vPMU framework doesn't allow Host or Guest own the PMU HW resource
>>> simultaneously. Only when there is no !exclude_guest event on host,
>>> guest is allowed to exclusively own the PMU HW resource.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just like FPU register, it is shared by VM and host during different
>>>> time and it is lately switched. But if IPI or timer interrupt uses FPU
>>>> register on host, there will be the same issue.
>>>
>>> I didn't fully get your point. When IPI or timer interrupt reach, a
>>> VM-exit is triggered to make CPU traps into host first and then the host
>> yes, it is.
>
> This is correct. And this is one of the points that we had debated
> internally whether we should do PMU context switch at vcpu loop
> boundary or VM Enter/exit boundary. (host-level) timer interrupt can
> force VM Exit, which I think happens every 4ms or 1ms, depending on
> configuration.
>
> One of the key reasons we currently propose this is because it is the
> same boundary as the legacy PMU, i.e., it would be simple to propose
> from the perf subsystem perspective.
>
> Performance wise, doing PMU context switch at vcpu boundary would be
> way better in general. But the downside is that perf sub-system lose
> the capability to profile majority of the KVM code (functions) when
> guest PMU is enabled.
>
>>
>>> interrupt handler is called. Or are you complaining the executing
>>> sequence of switching guest PMU MSRs and these interrupt handler?
>> In our vPMU implementation, it is ok if vPMU is switched in vm exit
>> path, however there is problem if vPMU is switched during vcpu thread
>> sched-out/sched-in path since IPI/timer irq interrupt access pmu
>> register in host mode.
>
> Oh, the IPI/timer irq handler will access PMU registers? I thought
> only the host-level NMI handler will access the PMU MSRs since PMI is
> registered under NMI.
>
> In that case, you should disable IRQ during vcpu context switch. For
> NMI, we prevent its handler from accessing the PMU registers. In
> particular, we use a per-cpu variable to guard that. So, the
> host-level PMI handler for perf sub-system will check the variable
> before proceeding.
perf core will access pmu hw in tick timer/hrtimer/ipi function call,
such as function perf_event_task_tick() is called in tick timer, there
are event_function_call(event, __perf_event_xxx, &value) in file
kernel/events/core.c.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240417065236.500011-1-gaosong@loongson.cn/T/#m15aeb79fdc9ce72dd5b374edd6acdcf7a9dafcf4
>
>>
>> In general it will be better if the switch is done in vcpu thread
>> sched-out/sched-in, else there is requirement to profile kvm
>> hypervisor.Even there is such requirement, it is only one option. In
>> most conditions, it will better if time of VM context exit is small.
>>
> Performance wise, agree, but there will be debate on perf
> functionality loss at the host level.
>
> Maybe, (just maybe), it is possible to do PMU context switch at vcpu
> boundary normally, but doing it at VM Enter/Exit boundary when host is
> profiling KVM kernel module. So, dynamically adjusting PMU context
> switch location could be an option.
>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Bibo Mao
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can we add callback handler in structure kvm_guest_cbs? just like
>>>>>>>> this:
>>>>>>>> @@ -6403,6 +6403,7 @@ static struct perf_guest_info_callbacks
>>>>>>>> kvm_guest_cbs
>>>>>>>> = {
>>>>>>>> .state = kvm_guest_state,
>>>>>>>> .get_ip = kvm_guest_get_ip,
>>>>>>>> .handle_intel_pt_intr = NULL,
>>>>>>>> + .lose_pmu = kvm_guest_lose_pmu,
>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> By the way, I do not know should the callback handler be triggered
>>>>>>>> in perf
>>>>>>>> core or detailed pmu hw driver. From ARM pmu hw driver, it is
>>>>>>>> triggered in
>>>>>>>> pmu hw driver such as function kvm_vcpu_pmu_resync_el0,
>>>>>>>> but I think it will be better if it is done in perf core.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think we want to take the approach of perf and KVM guests
>>>>>>> "fighting" over
>>>>>>> the PMU. That's effectively what we have today, and it's a mess
>>>>>>> for KVM because
>>>>>>> it's impossible to provide consistent, deterministic behavior for
>>>>>>> the guest. And
>>>>>>> it's just as messy for perf, which ends up having wierd, cumbersome
>>>>>>> flows that
>>>>>>> exists purely to try to play nice with KVM.
>>>>>> With existing pmu core code, in tick timer interrupt or IPI function
>>>>>> call interrupt pmu hw may be accessed by host when VM is running and
>>>>>> pmu is already granted to guest. KVM can not intercept host
>>>>>> IPI/timer interrupt, there is no pmu context switch, there will be
>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Bibo Mao
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-23 6:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 181+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-26 8:54 [RFC PATCH 00/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce passthrough vPM Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 01/41] perf: x86/intel: Support PERF_PMU_CAP_VPMU_PASSTHROUGH Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 17:04 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 17:21 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-11 17:24 ` Jim Mattson
2024-04-11 17:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 19:13 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-11 20:43 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 21:04 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-11 19:32 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 02/41] perf: Support guest enter/exit interfaces Xiong Zhang
2024-03-20 16:40 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2024-03-20 17:12 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-11 18:06 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 19:53 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-12 19:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-12 20:56 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-15 16:03 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-16 5:34 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-04-16 12:48 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-17 9:42 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-04-18 16:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-19 1:37 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-04-26 4:09 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 03/41] perf: Set exclude_guest onto nmi_watchdog Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 18:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 04/41] perf: core/x86: Add support to register a new vector for PMI handling Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 17:10 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 19:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-12 3:56 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-04-13 1:17 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 05/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Register PMI handler for passthrough PMU Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 19:07 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-12 5:44 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 06/41] perf: x86: Add function to switch PMI handler Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 19:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 19:34 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-12 6:03 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-04-12 5:57 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 07/41] perf/x86: Add interface to reflect virtual LVTPC_MASK bit onto HW Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 19:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-12 6:17 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 08/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Add get virtual LVTPC_MASK bit function Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 19:22 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 09/41] perf: core/x86: Forbid PMI handler when guest own PMU Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 19:26 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 10/41] perf: core/x86: Plumb passthrough PMU capability from x86_pmu to x86_pmu_cap Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 11/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce enable_passthrough_pmu module parameter and propage to KVM instance Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 20:54 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 21:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 12/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Plumb through passthrough PMU to vcpu for Intel CPUs Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 20:57 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 13/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Add a helper to check if passthrough PMU is enabled Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 14/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Allow RDPMC pass through Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 15/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Manage MSR interception for IA32_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 22:30 ` Jim Mattson
2024-04-11 23:27 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-13 2:10 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 16/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Create a function prototype to disable MSR interception Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 17/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Implement pmu function for Intel CPU " Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 18/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Intercept full-width GP counter MSRs by checking with perf capabilities Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:23 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 21:50 ` Jim Mattson
2024-04-12 16:01 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 19/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Whitelist PMU MSRs for passthrough PMU Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 20/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce PMU operation prototypes for save/restore PMU context Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 21/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce function prototype for Intel CPU to " Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 22/41] x86: Introduce MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS_SET for passthrough PMU Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 23/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Implement the save/restore of PMU state for Intel CPU Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:26 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-13 2:29 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-11 21:44 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 22:19 ` Jim Mattson
2024-04-11 23:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-13 3:19 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-13 3:03 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-13 3:34 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-13 4:25 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-15 6:06 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-15 10:04 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-15 16:44 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-15 17:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-15 17:54 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-15 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-22 2:14 ` maobibo
2024-04-22 17:01 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-23 1:01 ` maobibo
2024-04-23 2:44 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-23 2:53 ` maobibo
2024-04-23 3:13 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-23 3:26 ` maobibo
2024-04-23 3:59 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-23 3:55 ` maobibo
2024-04-23 4:23 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-23 6:08 ` maobibo [this message]
2024-04-23 6:45 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-23 7:10 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-23 8:24 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-23 8:51 ` maobibo
2024-04-23 16:50 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-23 12:12 ` maobibo
2024-04-23 17:02 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-24 1:07 ` maobibo
2024-04-24 8:18 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-24 15:00 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-25 3:55 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-25 4:24 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-25 16:13 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-25 20:16 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-25 20:43 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-25 21:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-26 1:46 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-26 3:12 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-26 4:02 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-26 4:46 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-26 14:09 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-26 18:41 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-26 19:06 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-26 19:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-27 3:04 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-28 0:58 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-28 6:01 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-29 17:44 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-01 17:43 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-05-01 18:00 ` Liang, Kan
2024-05-01 20:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-29 13:08 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-26 13:53 ` Liang, Kan
2024-04-26 1:50 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-04-18 21:21 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-18 21:41 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-19 1:02 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 24/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Zero out unexposed Counters/Selectors to avoid information leakage Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 21:56 ` Jim Mattson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 25/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce macro PMU_CAP_PERF_METRICS Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 26/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Add host_perf_cap field in kvm_caps to record host PMU capability Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:49 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 27/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Clear PERF_METRICS MSR for guest Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:50 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-13 3:29 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 28/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Switch IA32_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL at VM boundary Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:54 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 22:10 ` Jim Mattson
2024-04-11 22:54 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 23:08 ` Jim Mattson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 29/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Exclude existing vLBR logic from the passthrough PMU Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 30/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Switch PMI handler at KVM context switch boundary Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 31/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Call perf_guest_enter() at PMU context switch Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 32/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Add support for PMU context switch at VM-exit/enter Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 33/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Make check_pmu_event_filter() an exported function Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 34/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Intercept EVENT_SELECT MSR Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 35/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Allow writing to event selector for GP counters if event is allowed Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 36/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Intercept FIXED_CTR_CTRL MSR Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 21:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 37/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Allow writing to fixed counter selector if counter is exposed Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 22:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-13 4:12 ` Mi, Dapeng
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 38/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce PMU helper to increment counter Xiong Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 39/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Implement emulated counter increment for passthrough PMU Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 23:12 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 23:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 40/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Separate passthrough PMU logic in set/get_msr() from non-passthrough vPMU Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 23:18 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-18 21:54 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-01-26 8:54 ` [RFC PATCH 41/41] KVM: nVMX: Add nested virtualization support for passthrough PMU Xiong Zhang
2024-04-11 23:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 17:03 ` [RFC PATCH 00/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce passthrough vPM Sean Christopherson
2024-04-12 2:19 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-04-12 18:32 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-15 1:06 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-04-15 15:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-16 5:11 ` Zhang, Xiong Y
2024-04-18 20:46 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-18 21:52 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-19 19:14 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-19 22:02 ` Mingwei Zhang
2024-04-11 23:25 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-11 23:56 ` Mingwei Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=86d1f6d1-197a-ecd9-3349-a64da9ea9789@loongson.cn \
--to=maobibo@loongson.cn \
--cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
--cc=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=like.xu.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mizhang@google.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=samantha.alt@intel.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=xiong.y.zhang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=zhenyuw@linux.intel.com \
--cc=zhiyuan.lv@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).