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;
Message-ID: <42b45a5bc4dfa5ffdf908cb3e1b95839a2b6b596.camel@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 15/17] kvm: x86: Report CORE_CAPABILITY on
 GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
From:   Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@linux.intel.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Tue, 05 Mar 2019 15:03:28 +0800
In-Reply-To: <c0a3ef40-fd8a-7baf-9fbc-11baa379af5a@redhat.com>
References: <1551494711-213533-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
         <1551494711-213533-16-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
         <697ee0bd-a5f6-7712-017e-455eed5bc185@redhat.com>
         <f5053983dc12550edabc418b0493c6ec8deb1412.camel@linux.intel.com>
         <79b659fb-1c16-463d-aa74-f1b3d8a9db5d@redhat.com>
         <08b44b2b7aede11a350f234768d5c17f8445984e.camel@linux.intel.com>
         <c0a3ef40-fd8a-7baf-9fbc-11baa379af5a@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2019-03-04 at 12:14 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 04/03/19 12:10, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> > Like you said before, I think we don't need the condition judgment
> > "if(boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT))", but to set
> > F(CORE_CAPABILITY)
> > always for guest since MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY is emulated.
> > 
> > And we should set the right emulated value of MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY for
> > guest
> > in function kvm_get_core_capability() based on whether
> > boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT) just as you commented in the
> > next
> > patch.
> 
> Yes, that would certainly be better.  However, you'd also have to move
> MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY handling to x86.c, because you'd have to enable
> X86_FEATURE_CORE_CAPABILITY for AMD.
> 
> Paolo

Hi, Paolo

I just notice that F(ARCH_CAPABILITIES) is set unconditionally. However the
handling of MSR_IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES only exists with vmx, and the emulation
of this MSR is in vmx->arch_capabilities.
These will cause #GP when guest kernel rdmsr(MSR_IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITES) with AMD
CPU since there is handling for svm.
Maybe what I think is not correct due to my limit knowledge of
MSR_IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES and how kernel handles its related features.

If what I said above is true and it's indeed an issue. So based on the fact that
both MSR_IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES and MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY are feature-
enumerating MSR and we emulate them in KVM, there are 2 choices for us to handle
it:
1. we unconditionally set F(ARCH_CAPABILITIES) and F(CORE_CAPABILITY) for guest,
move the emulation of these 2 MSRs to vcpu->arch.***, and move all the handling 
of these 2 MSRs to x86.c.

2. we conditionally set F(ARCH_CAPABILITIES) and F(CORE_CAPABILITY) only if it
is intel CPU. So we just need to emulate these 2 MSRs in vmx->*** for intel CPU.

I prefer option 2 personally for CORE_CAPABILITY since it makes no sense to
expose MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY to other x86 vendors.
About ARCH_CAPABILITIES, it seems that we emulate it for generic x86 cpus that
!x86_match_cpu(cpu_no_speculation). So we should choose option 1, to move the
emulation and handling to x86.c?

Xiaoyao