Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 06/13] x86/PMU: Add public xenpmu.h

[Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/30/2013 09:30 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 30.09.13 at 15:25, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 09/25/2013 10:04 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > On 20.09.13 at 11:42, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > +/* Intel PMU registers and structures */
> > > > +#define XENPMU_CORE2_MAX_ARCH_PMCS     16
> > > > +#define XENPMU_CORE2_MAX_FIXED_PMCS    4
> > > > +struct core2_vpmu_context {
> > > > +    uint64_t global_ctrl;
> > > > +    uint64_t global_ovf_ctrl;
> > > > +    uint64_t global_status;
> > > > +    uint64_t global_ovf_status;
> > > > +    uint64_t fixed_ctrl;
> > > > +    uint64_t ds_area;
> > > > +    uint64_t pebs_enable;
> > > > +    uint64_t debugctl;
> > > > +    uint64_t fix_counters[XENPMU_CORE2_MAX_FIXED_PMCS];
> > > > +    struct {
> > > > +        uint64_t counter;
> > > > +        uint64_t control;
> > > > +    } arch_msr_pair[XENPMU_CORE2_MAX_ARCH_PMCS];
> > > > +};
> > > I realize that using embedded arrays in both AMD and Intel
> > > structures makes things easier to implement, but it reduces
> > > forward compatibility. I'd therefore prefer those to be made
> > > handles.
> > (I missed this comment earlier).
> >
> > This is not done because it's easier but because I need to keep the
> > structure in a shared page.
> Then a more dynamic layout (with just the array base offset in the
> page specified in the structure) would still be preferable as being
> more extensible.
I'll see how I can do this, I am afraid this may end up being a bit too 
convoluted (the
arrays will still need to be part of some structure with decribes a 
context).
-boris

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel