On Fri, Aug 27, 2021, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 02:49:50PM +, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 27, 2021, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 05:57:08PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > Use a per-CPU pointer to track perf's guest callbacks
On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 02:49:50PM +, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 05:57:08PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > Use a per-CPU pointer to track perf's guest callbacks so that KVM can set
> > > the callbacks more precis
On Fri, Aug 27, 2021, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 05:57:08PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Use a per-CPU pointer to track perf's guest callbacks so that KVM can set
> > the callbacks more precisely and avoid a lurking NULL pointer dereference.
>
> I'm completely failing
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 05:57:08PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Use a per-CPU pointer to track perf's guest callbacks so that KVM can set
> the callbacks more precisely and avoid a lurking NULL pointer dereference.
I'm completely failing to see how per-cpu helps anything here...
> On x86,
Use a per-CPU pointer to track perf's guest callbacks so that KVM can set
the callbacks more precisely and avoid a lurking NULL pointer dereference.
On x86, KVM supports being built as a module and thus can be unloaded.
And because the shared callbacks are referenced from IRQ/NMI context,
unloading
