Hi Reiji,
On 2022-10-27 15:33, Reiji Watanabe wrote:
Hi Marc,
> > +static void kvm_pmu_counter_increment(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > + unsigned long mask, u32 event)
> > +{
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + if (!kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu))
> > +
Hi Marc,
> > > +static void kvm_pmu_counter_increment(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > > + unsigned long mask, u32 event)
> > > +{
> > > + int i;
> > > +
> > > + if (!kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu))
> > > + return;
> > > +
> > > + if (!(__vcpu_
Hi Reiji,
Catching up on this.
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 05:30:21 +0100,
Reiji Watanabe wrote:
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 6:58 AM Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >
> > Ricardo recently pointed out that the PMU chained counter emulation
> > in KVM wasn't quite behaving like the one on actual hard
Hi Marc,
On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 02:58:05PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Ricardo recently pointed out that the PMU chained counter emulation
> in KVM wasn't quite behaving like the one on actual hardware, in
> the sense that a chained counter would expose an overflow on
> both halves of a chained
Ricardo recently pointed out that the PMU chained counter emulation
in KVM wasn't quite behaving like the one on actual hardware, in
the sense that a chained counter would expose an overflow on
both halves of a chained counter, while KVM would only expose the
overflow on the top half.
The differen
