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 1/2] KVM: x86: fix reporting of AMD speculation bug CPUID
 leaf
To:     Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
References: <1565854883-27019-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
 <1565854883-27019-2-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
 <CALMp9eQcRbMjQ_=jQ=qaYmh1Lavc3PYvm4Qcf3zY+N8j3zZe-w@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <0e29f624-10f5-7ab5-1823-280f32732b68@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:18:04 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALMp9eQcRbMjQ_=jQ=qaYmh1Lavc3PYvm4Qcf3zY+N8j3zZe-w@mail.gmail.com>
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 16/08/19 23:45, Jim Mattson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:41 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> The AMD_* bits have to be set from the vendor-independent
>> feature and bug flags, because KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID does not care
>> about the vendor and they should be set on Intel processors as well.
>> On top of this, SSBD, STIBP and AMD_SSB_NO bit were not set, and
>> VIRT_SSBD does not have to be added manually because it is a
>> cpufeature that comes directly from the host's CPUID bit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> 
> On AMD systems, aren't AMD_SSBD, AMD_STIBP, and AMD_SSB_NO set by
> inheritance from the host:
> 
> /* cpuid 0x80000008.ebx */
> const u32 kvm_cpuid_8000_0008_ebx_x86_features =
>         F(WBNOINVD) | F(AMD_IBPB) | F(AMD_IBRS) | F(AMD_SSBD) | F(VIRT_SSBD) |
>         F(AMD_SSB_NO) | F(AMD_STIBP) | F(AMD_STIBP_ALWAYS_ON);
> 
> I am curious why the cross-vendor settings go only one way. For
> example, you set AMD_STIBP on Intel processors that have STIBP, but
> you do not set INTEL_STIBP on AMD processors that have STIBP?
> Similarly, you set AMD_SSB_NO for Intel processors that are immune to
> SSB, but you do not set IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES.SSB_NO for AMD
> processors that are immune to SSB?
> 
> Perhaps there is another patch coming for reporting Intel bits on AMD?

I wasn't going to work on it but yes, they should be.  This patch just
fixed what was half-implemented.

Paolo