[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <204c0b60-5e39-eb61-da85-705c56604cde@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 19:34:03 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: "Stamatis, Ilias" <ilstam@...zon.com>,
"mlevitsk@...hat.com" <mlevitsk@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"jmattson@...gle.com" <jmattson@...gle.com>,
"Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
"vkuznets@...hat.com" <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
"mtosatti@...hat.com" <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
"zamsden@...il.com" <zamsden@...il.com>,
"wanpengli@...cent.com" <wanpengli@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/12] KVM: VMX: Remove vmx->current_tsc_ratio and
decache_tsc_multiplier()
On 25/05/21 18:34, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> I actually like the idea of storing the expected value in kvm_vcpu and the
>> current value in loaded_vmcs. We might use it for other things such as
>> reload_vmcs01_apic_access_page perhaps.
> I'm not necessarily opposed to aggressively shadowing the VMCS, but if we go
> that route then it should be a standalone series that implements a framework
> that can be easily extended to arbitrary fields. Adding fields to loaded_vmcs
> one at a time will be tedious and error prone. E.g. what makes TSC_MULTIPLIER
> more special than TSC_OFFSET, GUEST_IA32_PAT, GUEST_IA32_DEBUGCTL, GUEST_BNDCFGS,
> and other number of fields that are likely to persist for a given vmcs02?
That it can be changed via ioctls in a way that affects both vmcs01 and
vmcs02. So TSC_MULTIPLIER is in the same boat as TSC_OFFSET, which I
agree we should shadow more aggressively, but the others are different.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists