[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <35C3E23E-3BDE-4AFD-BD16-758A2D0B9037@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:23:16 -0800
From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>, dwmw@...zon.co.uk,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>, bp@...en8.de,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, aliguori@...zon.com,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] kvm: vmx: pass MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL and
MSR_IA32_PRED_CMD down to the guest
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 10/01/2018 18:14, Jim Mattson wrote:
>>>> If (a) is true, does "IBRS ALL THE TIME" usage is basically a CPU
>>>> change to just create all BTB/BHB entries to be tagged with
>>>> prediction-mode at creation-time and that tag to be compared to current
>>>> prediction-mode when CPU attempts to use BTB/BHB?
>>>
>>> I hope so, and I hope said prediction mode includes PCID/VPID too.
>>
>> Branch prediction entries should probably be tagged with PCID, VPID,
>> EP4TA, and thread ID...the same things used to tag TLB contexts.
>
> But if so, I don't see the need for IBPB.
It is highly improbable that a microcode patch can change how prediction
entries are tagged. IIRC, microcode may change the behavior of instructions
and “assists" (e.g., TLB miss). Not much more than that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists