[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7d783993-1ef5-e1ed-591c-c87a9d879782@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 15:16:48 +0800
From: "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@...el.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>,
"john.allen@....com" <john.allen@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/25] x86/fpu/xstate: Manually check and add
XFEATURE_CET_USER xstate bit
On 9/16/2023 12:35 AM, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-09-15 at 10:32 +0800, Yang, Weijiang wrote:
>>> Also, this doesn't discuss the real main reason for this patch, and
>>> that is that KVM will soon use the xfeature for user ibt, and so
>>> there
>>> will now be a reason to have XFEATURE_CET_USER depend on IBT.
>> This is one justification for Linux OS, another reason is there's
>> non-Linux
>> OS which is using the user IBT feature. I should make the reasons
>> clearer
>> in changelog, thanks for pointing it out!
> The point I was trying to make was today (before this series) nothing
> on the system can use user IBT. Not the host, and not in any guest
> because KVM doesn't support it. So the added xfeature dependency on IBT
> was not previously needed. It is being added only for KVM CET support
> (which, yes, may run on guests with non-standard CPUID).
Agree, I'll highlight this in changelog, thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists