[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180205111034.ie6vbui62wx2irkl@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 12:10:34 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Mihai Carabas <mihai.carabas@...cle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...zon.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [9/8] KVM: x86: limit MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL access based on CPUID
availability
* Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 30/01/2018 12:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Jan 2018, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 08:57 -0800, Jim Mattson wrote:
> >>> It's really hard to tell which patches are being proposed for which
> >>> repositories, but assuming that everything else is correct, I don't
> >>> think your condition is adequate. What if the physical CPU and the
> >>> virtual CPU both have CPUID.(EAX=7H,ECX=0):EDX[26], but only the
> >>> physical CPU has CPUID.(EAX=7H,ECX=0):EDX[27]? If the guest has write
> >>> access to MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, it can set MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL[1]
> >>> (STIBP), even though setting that bit in the guest should raise #GP.
> >>
> >> Everything we're talking about here is for tip/x86/pti. Which I note
> >> has just updated to be 4.15-based, although I thought it was going to
> >> stay on 4.14 for now. So I've updated my tree at
> >> http://git.infradead.org/linux-retpoline.git/shortlog/refs/heads/ibpb
> >> accordingly.
> >
> > Yes, we tried to stay on 4.14 base but this started to created nasty merge
> > conflicts for no value. Merging in v4.15 turned out to resolve those issues
> > while still serving as the feed branch for Gregs stable work. For the time
> > being we try to make stable backporting at least for 4.14/15 as painless as
> > possible.
>
> Great, then the "per-VCPU MSR bitmaps" branch
> (git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git refs/heads/msr-bitmaps)
> that I created last weekend can be pulled directly in tip/x86/pti.
Can this branch still be rebased, to fix the SoB chain of:
de3a0021a606 ("KVM: nVMX: Eliminate vmcs02 pool")
?
I'm not sure what workflow resulted in this commit, but it is missing your SoB:
commit de3a0021a60635de96aa92713c1a31a96747d72c
Author: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
AuthorDate: Mon Nov 27 17:22:25 2017 -0600
Commit: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
CommitDate: Sat Jan 27 09:43:03 2018 +0100
KVM: nVMX: Eliminate vmcs02 pool
The potential performance advantages of a vmcs02 pool have never been
realized. To simplify the code, eliminate the pool. Instead, a single
vmcs02 is allocated per VCPU when the VCPU enters VMX operation.
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # prereq for Spectre mitigation
Signed-off-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Kanda <mark.kanda@...cle.com>
Reviewed-by: Ameya More <ameya.more@...cle.com>
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
You probably rebased Radim'm tree?
If this tree can still be rebased I'd like to re-pull it into tip:x86/pti, as
those bits are not yet upstream.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists