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;
Date:   Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:39:09 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc:     KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Yazen Ghannam <Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kvm/x86: Move MSR_K7_HWCR to svm.c
Message-ID: <20190325183909.GQ12016@zn.tnic>
References: <20190325171649.7311-1-bp@alien8.de>
 <20190325171649.7311-2-bp@alien8.de>
 <20190325182133.GG31069@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190325182133.GG31069@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 11:21:33AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Won't this prevent emulating an AMD guest on Intel hardware, e.g. due to
> injecting #GPs during boot?

I guess, but...

> Keeping support in kvm_{get,set}_msr_common
> doesn't preclude svm_{get,set}_msr() from having SVM-specific handling for
> the MSR.

... is kvm_{get,set}_msr_common() supposed to cover for all those
overlapping MSRs between AMD and Intel? svm_{get,set}_msr() have a lot
more AMD-specific MSRs just like vmx_{get,set}_msr() respectively for
Intel.

Which would mean that if you really want to support those cross-vendor
emulations, you don't need the svm* and vmx* MSR accessors... or am I
missing something?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.