[PATCH v8 20/20] KVM: ARM64: Add a new kvm ARM PMU device
From: Andrew Jones <hidden>
Date: 2016-01-11 16:44:09
Also in:
kvm, kvmarm
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 04:29:03PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 11 January 2016 at 16:21, Andrew Jones [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 05:09:27PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:quoted
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 04:09:29PM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:quoted
Are vcpu ids already exposed to userspace (beyond the stupid KVM_IRQ_LINE) ioctl and as such we're bound to whatever upper limit and format they have?The only other place I found is KVM_CREATE_VCPU. I suppose we could move to MPIDR for that, and it would be a nice way to handle the "userspace determines MPIDR" work that I plan to do. Both KVM and its userspaces would still use some counter-based vcpu identifiers internally, to avoid large, sparse structures, but I guess the advantage is that they don't have to agree on how they do that. The 'vcpu id' used by KVM_CREATE_VCPU is already 32-bits, and is supposed to be an arbitrary identifier. That all looks good for converting to MPIDR.Correction. I understand that vcpu-id is "supposed" to be an arbitrary identifier now, but it doesn't appear that all the assumptions that it's a counter are gone yet... virt/kvm/kvm_main.c has static int kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu(struct kvm *kvm, u32 id) ... if (id >= KVM_MAX_VCPUS) return -EINVAL;I think the last time we talked about supporting "userspace determines MPIDR" the idea was to do it by allowing userspace to write to the MPIDR register with KVM_SET_ONE_REG. So you'd create a bunch of CPUs with vcpu-ids as usual, and then the MPIDRs would be set for them later as appropriate (or not at all, if userspace was an older qemu).
Yup, I recall that. I'm just expanding this discussion into that one. If we wanted to single vcpu identifier type, and we wanted it to be MPIDR, then I guess we'd want to pass it in to KVM_CREATE_VCPU too, at which point we no longer need to set it later with KVM_SET_ONE_REG. Thanks, drew