On Sat, 2016-08-13 at 01:06 -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
> > > Wouldn't that mean that you'd be unable to use
> > >
> > > -cpu foo,pmu=off
> > >
> > > if CPU model 'foo' doesn't support a PMU? I'd expect that
> > > to work.
> >
> > The current precedent (has_el3) doesn't work like that: if
> > foo
On 08/01/2016 08:32 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 1 August 2016 at 14:26, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>> On Mon, 2016-08-01 at 15:08 +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
I'm not sure a warning is enough: if I start a guest and
explicitly ask for a PMU, I expect it to be there, or for
the guest
On Mon, 2016-08-01 at 14:32 +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > Wouldn't that mean that you'd be unable to use
> >
> > -cpu foo,pmu=off
> >
> > if CPU model 'foo' doesn't support a PMU? I'd expect that
> > to work.
>
> The current precedent (has_el3) doesn't work like that: if
> foo isn't a CPU wh
On 1 August 2016 at 14:26, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-08-01 at 15:08 +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
>> > I'm not sure a warning is enough: if I start a guest and
>> > explicitly ask for a PMU, I expect it to be there, or for
>> > the guest not to start at all. How does x86 behave in this
>
On Mon, 2016-08-01 at 15:08 +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > I'm not sure a warning is enough: if I start a guest and
> > explicitly ask for a PMU, I expect it to be there, or for
> > the guest not to start at all. How does x86 behave in this
> > regard?
>
> Peter had a good suggestion for this. We
On 1 August 2016 at 14:08, Andrew Jones wrote:
> Peter had a good suggestion for this. We need to wrap the property
> addition in an arm_feature check like the has_el3 property. That will
> remove it from all cpu types that don't support it. Then there's no
> need for the enable_pmu && !has_pmu ch
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 02:04:59PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 08:54 +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:38:16AM -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
> > >
> > > This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
> > > in guest vm. There are se
On Fri, 2016-07-29 at 08:54 +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:38:16AM -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
> >
> > This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
> > in guest vm. There are several reasons to justify this option. First
> > vpmu can be problematic for
On 29 July 2016 at 07:54, Andrew Jones wrote:
> OK, so this property will be exposed to all ARM cpu types, and if a user
> turns it on, then it will stay on for all types, except when using KVM
> with an aarch64 cpu type, and KVM doesn't support it. This could mislead
> users to believe they'll ge
On 29 July 2016 at 16:08, Wei Huang wrote:
>
>
> On 07/29/2016 02:57 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 28 July 2016 at 17:38, Wei Huang wrote:
>>> This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
>>> in guest vm. There are several reasons to justify this option. First
>>> vpmu ca
On 07/29/2016 02:57 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 28 July 2016 at 17:38, Wei Huang wrote:
>> This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
>> in guest vm. There are several reasons to justify this option. First
>> vpmu can be problematic for cross-migration between differe
On 07/29/2016 01:54 AM, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:38:16AM -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
>> This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
>> in guest vm. There are several reasons to justify this option. First
>> vpmu can be problematic for cross-migration b
On 28 July 2016 at 17:38, Wei Huang wrote:
> This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
> in guest vm. There are several reasons to justify this option. First
> vpmu can be problematic for cross-migration between different SoC as
> perf counters is architecture-dependent.
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:38:16AM -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
> This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
> in guest vm. There are several reasons to justify this option. First
> vpmu can be problematic for cross-migration between different SoC as
> perf counters is architec
On 2016/7/29 0:38, Wei Huang wrote:
> This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
> in guest vm. There are several reasons to justify this option. First
> vpmu can be problematic for cross-migration between different SoC as
> perf counters is architecture-dependent. It is
This patch adds a pmu=[on/off] option to enable/disable vpmu support
in guest vm. There are several reasons to justify this option. First
vpmu can be problematic for cross-migration between different SoC as
perf counters is architecture-dependent. It is more flexible to
have an option to turn it on
16 matches
Mail list logo
