From: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Xiong Zhang <xiong.y.zhang@linux.intel.com>,
pbonzini@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, kan.liang@intel.com,
zhenyuw@linux.intel.com, dapeng1.mi@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 00/41] KVM: x86/pmu: Introduce passthrough vPM
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:02:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAL715WJQuhnNB6M8vAKVicvkp1Jt_K6H9C8rj866+YmbxYXGcg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZiLCjutwO6XIQp5Z@google.com>
> Currently, at a feature level, I mentally bin things into two rough categories
> in KVM:
>
> 1. Virtualized - Guest state is loaded into hardware, or hardware supports
> running with both host and guest state (e.g. TSC scaling), and
> the guest has full read/write access to its state while running.
>
> 2. Emulated - Guest state is never loaded into hardware, and instead the
> feature/state is emulated in software.
>
> There is no "Passthrough" because that's (mostly) covered by my Virtualized
> definition. And because I also think of passthrough as being about *assets*,
> not about the features themselves.
Sure. In fact, "virtualized" works for me as well. My mind is aligned with this.
>
> They are far from perfect definitions, e.g. individual assets can be passed through,
> virtualized by hardware, or emulated in software. But for the most part, I think
> classifying features as virtualized vs. emulated works well, as it helps reason
> about the expected behavior and performance of a feature.
>
> E.g. for some virtualized features, certain assets may need to be explicitly passed
> through, e.g. access to x2APIC MSRs for APICv. But APICv itself still falls
> into the virtualized category, e.g. the "real" APIC state isn't passed through
> to the guest.
>
> If KVM didn't already have a PMU implementation to deal with, this wouldn't be
> an issue, e.g. we'd just add "enable_pmu" and I'd mentally bin it into the
> virtualized category. But we need to distinguish between the two PMU models,
> and using "enable_virtualized_pmu" would be comically confusing for users. :-)
>
> And because this is user visible, I would like to come up with a name that (some)
> KVM users will already be familiar with, i.e. will have some chance of intuitively
> understand without having to go read docs.
>
> Which is why I proposed "mediated"; what we are proposing for the PMU is similar
> to the "mediated device" concepts in VFIO. And I also think "mediated" is a good
> fit in general, e.g. this becomes my third classification:
>
> 3. Mediated - Guest is context switched at VM-Enter/VM-Exit, i.e. is loaded
> into hardware, but the guest does NOT have full read/write access
> to the feature.
>
> But my main motiviation for using "mediated" really is that I hope that it will
> help KVM users grok the basic gist of the design without having to read and
> understand KVM documentation, because there is already existing terminology in
> the broader KVM space.
Understand this part. Mediated is the fact that KVM sits in between,
but I feel we can find a better name :)
>
> > We intercept the control plan in current design, but the only thing
> > we do is the event filtering. No fancy code change to emulate the control
> > registers. So, it is still a passthrough logic.
>
> It's not though. Passthrough very specifically means the guest has unfettered
> access to some asset, and/or KVM does no filtering/adjustments whatseover.
>
> "Direct" is similar, e.g. KVM's uses "direct" in MMU context to refer to addresses
> that don't require KVM to intervene and translate. E.g. entire MMUs can be direct,
> but individual shadow pages can also be direct (no corresponding guest PTE to
> translate).
Oh, isn't "direct" a perfect word for this? Look, our new design does
not require KVM to translate the encodings into events and into
encoding again (in "perf subsystem") before entering HW. It is really
"direct" in this sense, no?
Neither does KVM do any translation of the event encodings across
micro-architectures. So, it is really _direct_ from this perspective
as well.
On the other hand, "direct" means straightforward, indicating
passthrough, but not always, in which KVM retains the power of
control.
>
> For this flavor of PMU, it's not full passthrough or direct. Some assets are
> passed through, e.g. PMCs, but others are not.
>
> > In some (rare) business cases, I think maybe we could fully passthrough
> > the control plan as well. For instance, sole-tenant machine, or
> > full-machine VM + full offload. In case if there is a cpu errata, KVM
> > can force vmexit and dynamically intercept the selectors on all vcpus
> > with filters checked. It is not supported in current RFC, but maybe
> > doable in later versions.
>
> Heh, that's an argument for using something other than "passthrough", because if
> we ever do support such a use case, we'd end up with enable_fully_passthrough_pmu,
> or in the spirit of KVM shortlogs, really_passthrough_pmu :-)
Full passthrough is possible and the naming of "really_passthrough"
and others can all be alive under the "direct PMU".
>
> Though I think even then I would vote for "enable_dedicated_pmu", or something
> along those lines, purely to avoid overloading "passthrough", i.e. to try to use
> passhtrough strictly when talking about assets, not features. And because unless
> we can also passthrough LVTPC, it still wouldn't be a complete passthrough of the
> PMU as KVM would be emulating PMIs.
I agree to avoid "passthrough". Dedicated is also a fine word. It
indicates the PMU is dedicated to serve the KVM guests. But the scope
might be a little narrow. This is just my opinion. Maybe it is because
my mind has been stuck with "direct" :)
Thanks.
-Mingwei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-19 22:03 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
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 [this message]
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=CAL715WJQuhnNB6M8vAKVicvkp1Jt_K6H9C8rj866+YmbxYXGcg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=mizhang@google.com \
--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=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).