Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] x86/cpufeatures: Add AMD feature bits for
 Prediction Command
To:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>, <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        <tglx@linutronix.de>, <karahmed@amazon.de>, <x86@kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        <bp@alien8.de>, <peterz@infradead.org>, <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        <ak@linux.intel.com>, <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        <gregkh@linux-foundation.org>
References: <1516528149-9370-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
 <1516528149-9370-3-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
 <ce7ea88c-c5d4-154c-37fd-477d517914f3@amd.com>
 <aed6fea6-01f0-823d-0c2e-3c9b401293f1@citrix.com>
 <568a0210-43a1-5580-c0f4-d6d8cc5e982a@amd.com>
From:   Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Message-ID: <046d1752-bf19-d80e-a7ce-cdf521bacf8c@citrix.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:33:21 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <568a0210-43a1-5580-c0f4-d6d8cc5e982a@amd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 22/01/18 14:31, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> On 1/21/2018 12:01 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 21/01/18 17:50, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>>> On 1/21/2018 3:49 AM, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>>> AMD doesn't implement the Speculation Control MSR that Intel does, but
>>>> the Prediction Control MSR does exist and is advertised by a separate
>>>> CPUID bit. Add support for that.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
>>>> ---
>>>>  arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 +
>>>>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c    | 1 +
>>>>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>>> index 2efb8d4..8c9e5c0 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>>> @@ -207,6 +207,7 @@
>>>>  #define X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE_AMD	( 7*32+13) /* AMD Retpoline mitigation for Spectre variant 2 */
>>>>  #define X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PPIN		( 7*32+14) /* Intel Processor Inventory Number */
>>>>  
>>>> +#define X86_FEATURE_AMD_PRED_CMD	( 7*32+17) /* Prediction Command MSR (AMD) */
>>>>  #define X86_FEATURE_MBA			( 7*32+18) /* Memory Bandwidth Allocation */
>>>>  #define X86_FEATURE_RSB_CTXSW		( 7*32+19) /* Fill RSB on context switches */
>>>>  
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
>>>> index df11f5d..4eb90b2 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
>>>> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = {
>>>>  	{ X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE,	CPUID_EDX,  7, 0x80000007, 0 },
>>>>  	{ X86_FEATURE_CPB,		CPUID_EDX,  9, 0x80000007, 0 },
>>>>  	{ X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK,    CPUID_EDX, 11, 0x80000007, 0 },
>>>> +	{ X86_FEATURE_AMD_PRED_CMD,	CPUID_EBX, 12, 0x80000008, 0 },
>>> I replied to the previous version, but I'll add it here, too.
>>>
>>> This should be moved to the existing 0x80000008/EBX entry rather than have
>>> it in scattered.
>>>
>>> Also, there will be a total of three bits:
>>>   IBPB:  0x80000008 EBX[12]
>>>   IBRS:  0x80000008 EBX[14]
>>>   STIBP: 0x80000008 EBX[15]
>>>
>>> Since IBRS and STIBP share the same MSR, if a processor only supports
>>> STIBP (MSR bit 1), for ease of software implementation the processor
>>> does not GP fault attempts to write bit 0. In a similar manner, if a
>>> processor only suppors IBRS (MSR bit 0), the processor does not GP
>>> fault attempts to write bit 1.
>> Are you able to comment on the read behaviour after a write which is
>> ignored?
>>
>> If the behaviour is "read as written" then virt cases are fine.  If the
>> "ignore" causes a zero to be read back, then we're still going to need
>> to intercept and emulate all VM accesses.
> The behavior is "read as written", so the bit will be updated even though
> the support for the bit is not present.

Fantastic!  Thanks for confirming.

~Andrew