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] KVM: Expose the split lock detection feature to guest
 VM
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Jingqi Liu <jingqi.liu@intel.com>, rkrcmar@redhat.com,
        mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        wei.w.wang@intel.com, Robert Hoo <robert.hu@linux.intel.com>
References: <1530709593-87702-1-git-send-email-jingqi.liu@intel.com>
 <7813a04b-8058-538b-8c9b-cdd01ce119ac@redhat.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1807041636340.1752@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt: addr=pbonzini@redhat.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata=
 xsEhBFRCcBIBDqDGsz4K0zZun3jh+U6Z9wNGLKQ0kSFyjN38gMqU1SfP+TUNQepFHb/Gc0E2
 CxXPkIBTvYY+ZPkoTh5xF9oS1jqI8iRLzouzF8yXs3QjQIZ2SfuCxSVwlV65jotcjD2FTN04
 hVopm9llFijNZpVIOGUTqzM4U55sdsCcZUluWM6x4HSOdw5F5Utxfp1wOjD/v92Lrax0hjiX
 DResHSt48q+8FrZzY+AUbkUS+Jm34qjswdrgsC5uxeVcLkBgWLmov2kMaMROT0YmFY6A3m1S
 P/kXmHDXxhe23gKb3dgwxUTpENDBGcfEzrzilWueOeUWiOcWuFOed/C3SyijBx3Av/lbCsHU
 Vx6pMycNTdzU1BuAroB+Y3mNEuW56Yd44jlInzG2UOwt9XjjdKkJZ1g0P9dwptwLEgTEd3Fo
 UdhAQyRXGYO8oROiuh+RZ1lXp6AQ4ZjoyH8WLfTLf5g1EKCTc4C1sy1vQSdzIRu3rBIjAvnC
 tGZADei1IExLqB3uzXKzZ1BZ+Z8hnt2og9hb7H0y8diYfEk2w3R7wEr+Ehk5NQsT2MPI2QBd
 wEv1/Aj1DgUHZAHzG1QN9S8wNWQ6K9DqHZTBnI1hUlkp22zCSHK/6FwUCuYp1zcAEQEAAc0f
 UGFvbG8gQm9uemluaSA8Ym9uemluaUBnbnUub3JnPsLBTQQTAQIAIwUCVEJ7AwIbAwcLCQgH
 AwIBBhUIAgkKCwQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJEH4VEAzNNmmxNcwOniaZVLsuy1lW/ntYCA0Caz0i
 sHpmecK8aWlvL9wpQCk4GlOX9L1emyYXZPmzIYB0IRqmSzAlZxi+A2qm9XOxs5gJ2xqMEXX5
 FMtUH3kpkWWJeLqe7z0EoQdUI4EG988uv/tdZyqjUn2XJE+K01x7r3MkUSFz/HZKZiCvYuze
 VlS0NTYdUt5jBXualvAwNKfxEkrxeHjxgdFHjYWhjflahY7TNRmuqPM/Lx7wAuyoDjlYNE40
 Z+Kun4/KjMbjgpcF4Nf3PJQR8qXI6p3so2qsSn91tY7DFSJO6v2HwFJkC2jU95wxfNmTEUZc
 znXahYbVOwCDJRuPrE5GKFd/XJU9u5hNtr/uYipHij01WXal2cce1S5mn1/HuM1yo1u8xdHy
 IupCd57EWI948e8BlhpujUCU2tzOb2iYS0kpmJ9/oLVZrOcSZCcCl2P0AaCAsj59z2kwQS9D
 du0WxUs8waso0Qq6tDEHo8yLCOJDzSz4oojTtWe4zsulVnWV+wu70AioemAT8S6JOtlu60C5
 dHgQUD1Tp+ReXpDKXmjbASJx4otvW0qah3o6JaqO79tbDqIvncu3tewwp6c85uZd48JnIOh3
 utBAu684nJakbbvZUGikJfxd887ATQRUQnHuAQgAx4dxXO6/Zun0eVYOnr5GRl76+2UrAAem
 Vv9Yfn2PbDIbxXqLff7oyVJIkw4WdhQIIvvtu5zH24iYjmdfbg8iWpP7NqxUQRUZJEWbx2CR
 wkMHtOmzQiQ2tSLjKh/cHeyFH68xjeLcinR7jXMrHQK+UCEw6jqi1oeZzGvfmxarUmS0uRuf
 fAb589AJW50kkQK9VD/9QC2FJISSUDnRC0PawGSZDXhmvITJMdD4TjYrePYhSY4uuIV02v02
 8TVAaYbIhxvDY0hUQE4r8ZbGRLn52bEzaIPgl1p/adKfeOUeMReg/CkyzQpmyB1TSk8lDMxQ
 zCYHXAzwnGi8WU9iuE1P0wARAQABwsEzBBgBAgAJBQJUQnHuAhsMAAoJEH4VEAzNNmmxp1EO
 oJy0uZggJm7gZKeJ7iUpeX4eqUtqelUw6gU2daz2hE/jsxsTbC/w5piHmk1H1VWDKEM4bQBT
 uiJ0bfo55SWsUNN+c9hhIX+Y8LEe22izK3w7mRpvGcg+/ZRG4DEMHLP6JVsv5GMpoYwYOmHn
 plOzCXHvmdlW0i6SrMsBDl9rw4AtIa6bRwWLim1lQ6EM3PWifPrWSUPrPcw4OLSwFk0CPqC4
 HYv/7ZnASVkR5EERFF3+6iaaVi5OgBd81F1TCvCX2BEyIDRZLJNvX3TOd5FEN+lIrl26xecz
 876SvcOb5SL5SKg9/rCBufdPSjojkGFWGziHiFaYhbuI2E+NfWLJtd+ZvWAAV+O0d8vFFSvr
 iy9enJ8kxJwhC0ECbSKFY+W1eTIhMD3aeAKY90drozWEyHhENf4l/V+Ja5vOnW+gCDQkGt2Y
 1lJAPPSIqZKvHzGShdh8DduC0U3xYkfbGAUvbxeepjgzp0uEnBXfPTy09JGpgWbg0w91GyfT
 /ujKaGd4vxG2Ei+MMNDmS1SMx7wu0evvQ5kT9NPzyq8R2GIhVSiAd2jioGuTjX6AZCFv3ToO
 53DliFMkVTecLptsXaesuUHgL9dKIfvpm+rNXRn9wAwGjk0X/A==
Message-ID: <a83b9b41-afbb-016d-528b-029f1b6228ae@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jul 2018 18:21:01 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1807041636340.1752@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 04/07/2018 16:51, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> There is no rush for this to be in KVM/QEMU now because all what exists for
> this new split lock thing is 'silicon' running on an emulator. And w/o
> support in the kernel proper this is completely useless.

That's good.  I assumed it was IceLake, in which case the feature would
block the definition of a standard IceLake CPU model in QEMU.

> So this needs the following things:
> 
>   1) Proper enumeration via CPUID or MISC_FEATURES. The current detection
>      hack is just broken.

Yes please.

>   2) A proper host side implementation, which then automatically makes the
>      stuff usable in a guest once it is exposed.

If the CPUID bit or MISC_FEATURES is added, you don't even need the host
side for the guests to use it.  It's only needed now because of the ugly
MSR-based detection.

>   3) A proper way how to expose MSR_TEST_CTL to the guest, but surely not
>      with extra split_lock_ctrl voodoo. It's an MSR nothing else. KVM/QEMU
>      have standartized ways to deal with MSRs and the required selective
>      bitwise access control.

That part is pretty much standard, I'm not worried about it.  We have
one variable in struct kvm_vcpu_arch for each MSR (or set of MSRs) that
we expose, so that's the split_lock_ctrl voodoo. :)

Once the detection is sorted out, KVM is easy.

Paolo