.../selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h | 7 + .../selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_counters_test.c | 267 ++++++++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 249 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
(I was positive I had sent this already, but I couldn't find it on the mailing list to reply to and ask for reviews.) Extend pmu_counters_test to AMD CPUs. As the AMD PMU is quite different from Intel with different events and feature sets, this series introduces a new code path to test it, specifically focusing on the core counters including the PerfCtrExtCore and PerfMonV2 features. Northbridge counters and cache counters exist, but are not as important and can be deferred to a later series. The first patch is a bug fix that could be submitted separately. The series has been tested on both Intel and AMD machines, but I have not found an AMD machine old enough to lack PerfCtrExtCore. I have made efforts that no part of the code has any dependency on its presence. I am aware of similar work in this direction done by Jinrong Liang [1]. He told me he is not working on it currently and I am not intruding by making my own submission. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20231121115457.76269-1-cloudliang@tencent.com/ Colton Lewis (6): KVM: x86: selftests: Fix typos in macro variable use KVM: x86: selftests: Define AMD PMU CPUID leaves KVM: x86: selftests: Set up AMD VM in pmu_counters_test KVM: x86: selftests: Test read/write core counters KVM: x86: selftests: Test core events KVM: x86: selftests: Test PerfMonV2 .../selftests/kvm/include/x86_64/processor.h | 7 + .../selftests/kvm/x86_64/pmu_counters_test.c | 267 ++++++++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 249 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) -- 2.46.0.76.ge559c4bf1a-goog
On Tue, Aug 13, 2024, Colton Lewis wrote: > (I was positive I had sent this already, but I couldn't find it on the > mailing list to reply to and ask for reviews.) You did[*], it's sitting in my todo folder. Two things. 1. Err on the side of caution when potentially resending, and tag everything RESEND. Someone seeing a RESEND version without having seen the original version is no big deal. But someone seeing two copies of the same patches/emails can get quite confusing. 2. Something is funky in your send flow. The original posing says 0/7 in the cover letter, but there are only 6 patches. [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240802182240.1916675-1-coltonlewis@google.com
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 13, 2024, Colton Lewis wrote: >> (I was positive I had sent this already, but I couldn't find it on the >> mailing list to reply to and ask for reviews.) > You did[*], it's sitting in my todo folder. Two things. > 1. Err on the side of caution when potentially resending, and tag > everything > RESEND. Someone seeing a RESEND version without having seen the original > version > is no big deal. But someone seeing two copies of the same patches/emails > can get > quite confusing. Sorry for jumping the gun. I couldn't find the original patches in my email or on the (wrong) list and panicked. I will also tag RESENDs appropriately in the future. > 2. Something is funky in your send flow. The original posing says 0/7 in > the > cover letter, but there are only 6 patches. Copy/paste error on my end. Before sending the first time I decided to drop one of my patches because it wasn't useful. I copied from the cover letter I had already written but forgot to change 7 to 6. > [*] > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240802182240.1916675-1-coltonlewis@google.com
On Tue, Aug 13, 2024, Colton Lewis wrote: > Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes: > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2024, Colton Lewis wrote: > > > (I was positive I had sent this already, but I couldn't find it on the > > > mailing list to reply to and ask for reviews.) > > > You did[*], it's sitting in my todo folder. Two things. > > > 1. Err on the side of caution when potentially resending, and tag > > everything > > RESEND. Someone seeing a RESEND version without having seen the > > original version > > is no big deal. But someone seeing two copies of the same > > patches/emails can get > > quite confusing. > > Sorry for jumping the gun. I couldn't find the original patches in my > email or on the (wrong) list and panicked. Ha, no worries. FWIW, I highly recommend using lore if you can't (quickly) find something in your own mailbox. If it hit a tracked list, lore will have it. And if you use our corporate mail, the retention policy is 18 months unless you go out of your way to tag mails to be kept, i.e. lore is more trustworthy in the long run. https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=f:coltonlewis@google.com
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 13, 2024, Colton Lewis wrote: >> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes: >> > On Tue, Aug 13, 2024, Colton Lewis wrote: >> > > (I was positive I had sent this already, but I couldn't find it on >> the >> > > mailing list to reply to and ask for reviews.) >> > You did[*], it's sitting in my todo folder. Two things. >> > 1. Err on the side of caution when potentially resending, and tag >> > everything >> > RESEND. Someone seeing a RESEND version without having seen the >> > original version >> > is no big deal. But someone seeing two copies of the same >> > patches/emails can get >> > quite confusing. >> Sorry for jumping the gun. I couldn't find the original patches in my >> email or on the (wrong) list and panicked. > Ha, no worries. FWIW, I highly recommend using lore if you can't > (quickly) find > something in your own mailbox. If it hit a tracked list, lore will have > it. And > if you use our corporate mail, the retention policy is 18 months unless > you go > out of your way to tag mails to be kept, i.e. lore is more trustworthy in > the > long run. > https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=f:coltonlewis@google.com I did. I have a bookmark for lore, but I now realize that bookmark was only searching the kvmarm list and this series isn't going to be there for obvious reasons. I've fixed that.
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.