On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:11:57PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:On 7/11/12 3:53 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:OK that's may be BTSes. What about -e cycles:p? BTW are you using yourOn Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:49:47AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 10:10 +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
Looks like Avi is right about the overshoot. Can you test something like this?
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
index 166546e..5fb371a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
@@ -1374,8 +1374,11 @@ static struct perf_guest_switch_msr *intel_guest_get_msrs(int *nr)
arr[0].msr = MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL;
arr[0].host = x86_pmu.intel_ctrl & ~cpuc->intel_ctrl_guest_mask;
arr[0].guest = x86_pmu.intel_ctrl & ~cpuc->intel_ctrl_host_mask;
+ arr[1].msr = MSR_IA32_PEBS_ENABLE;
+ arr[1].host = cpuc->pebs_enabled;
+ arr[1].guest = 0;
+ *nr = 2;
- *nr = 1;
return arr;
}
So far the 64-bit Fedora 10 VM with both a Fedora 10 stock kernel
and a 2.6.38 kernel have not faired well - and that's the only VM I
have tried at the moment. Using -e cycles:pp I have been able to
lock up the VM 3 times out of 3 series of tests with perf-kvm that
includes network traffic (e.g., netperf), disk I/O (dd based to
create a file with dsync flag) and pure userspace cpu bound (openssl
speed). May or may not be related.
patch to set exclude_guest parameter? If not use -e cycles:Hp.
Also, I noted that 'perf kvm --guest record -e cycles:pp' does notHost events do not suppose to generate events while guest is running.
generate a whole lot of samples -- like < 100 in a 20-second sample
-- despite the fact that the guest is rather busy.