[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7dbf6cad-f03d-640c-bc95-d82deaa30cb7@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 11:55:52 -0500
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@...zon.de>
Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Arjan Van De Ven <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] KVM: x86: Add IBPB support
On 31/01/2018 11:50, Jim Mattson wrote:
>> + if (to_vmx(vcpu)->save_spec_ctrl_on_exit) {
>> + nested_vmx_disable_intercept_for_msr(
>> + msr_bitmap_l1, msr_bitmap_l0,
>> + MSR_IA32_PRED_CMD,
>> + MSR_TYPE_R);
>> + }
> I don't think this should be predicated on
> "to_vmx(vcpu)->save_spec_ctrl_on_exit." Why not just
> "guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_IBPB)"? Also, the final argument to
> nested_vmx_disable_intercept_for_msr should be MSR_TYPE_W rather than
> MSR_TYPE_R.
In fact this MSR can even be passed down unconditionally, since it needs
no save/restore and has no ill performance effect on the sibling
hyperthread.
Only MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL needs to be conditional on
"to_vmx(vcpu)->save_spec_ctrl_on_exit".
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists