[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0575AF4FD06DD142AD198903C74E1CC87A619255@ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 00:00:23 +0000
From: "Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>
To: "valdis.kletnieks@...edu" <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>
CC: Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: Support "Enhanced IBRS" on future
CPUs
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 23:42:24 +0000, "Van De Ven, Arjan" said:
>
> > the guest is not the problem; guests obviously will already honor if Enhanced
> > IBRS is enumerated. The problem is mixed migration pools where the
> hypervisor
> > may need to decide to not pass this enumeration through to the guest.
>
> For bonus points: What should happen to a VM that is live migrated from one
> hypervisor to another, and the hypervisors have different IBRS support?
Doctor Doctor it hurts when I do this....
Migration tends to only work between HV's that are relatively homogeneous, that's nothing new... folks who run clouds or bigger pools know this obviously.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists