Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks

[PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 01/13] perf: Ensure perf_guest_cbs aren't reloaded between !NULL check and deref · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
Re: [PATCH v2 01/13] perf: Ensure perf_guest_cbs aren't reloaded between !NULL check and deref · Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> · 2021-08-28
Re: [PATCH v2 01/13] perf: Ensure perf_guest_cbs aren't reloaded between !NULL check and deref · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-09-16
[PATCH v2 02/13] KVM: x86: Register perf callbacks after calling vendor's hardware_setup() · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 03/13] KVM: x86: Register Processor Trace interrupt hook iff PT enabled in guest · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 04/13] perf: Stop pretending that perf can handle multiple guest callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 07/13] perf/core: Use static_call to optimize perf_guest_info_callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 08/13] KVM: x86: Drop current_vcpu for kvm_running_vcpu + kvm_arch_vcpu variable · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 06/13] perf/core: Rework guest callbacks to prepare for static_call support · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 09/13] KVM: x86: More precisely identify NMI from guest when handling PMI · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 05/13] perf: Force architectures to opt-in to guest callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
Re: [PATCH v2 05/13] perf: Force architectures to opt-in to guest callbacks · Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> · 2021-08-28
Re: [PATCH v2 05/13] perf: Force architectures to opt-in to guest callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-09-16
Re: [PATCH v2 05/13] perf: Force architectures to opt-in to guest callbacks · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-09-21
Re: [PATCH v2 05/13] perf: Force architectures to opt-in to guest callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-09-21
[PATCH v2 10/13] KVM: Move x86's perf guest info callbacks to generic KVM · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 11/13] KVM: x86: Move Intel Processor Trace interrupt handler to vmx.c · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 13/13] KVM: arm64: Drop perf.c and fold its tiny bits of code into arm.c / pmu.c · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
[PATCH v2 12/13] KVM: arm64: Convert to the generic perf callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-08-28
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> · 2021-08-28
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-09-16
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> · 2021-09-17
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> · 2021-09-17
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-09-20
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> · 2021-09-20
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-09-20
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> · 2021-09-20
Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] perf: KVM: Fix, optimize, and clean up callbacks · Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> · 2021-09-20

From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Date: 2021-09-20 13:18:42
Also in: kvm, kvmarm, linux-perf-users, linux-riscv, lkml, xen-devel

On 20/09/21 14:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:

quoted

I think that's only ARM, and even then it is only because of
limitations of the hardware which mostly apply only if VHE is not in
use.

If anything, it's ARM that should support module build in VHE mode
(Linux would still need to know whether it will be running at EL1 or
EL2, but KVM's functionality is as self-contained as on x86 in the VHE
case).

I don't see this happening anytime soon. At least not before we
declare the arm64 single kernel image policy to be obsolete.

--verbose please. :)  I am sure you're right, but I don't understand the 
link between the two.

Paolo


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help