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:   Thu, 12 Dec 2019 10:27:21 -0800
From:   Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To:     Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com>
Cc:     Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Tony W Wang-oc <TonyWWang-oc@zhaoxin.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/19] x86/cpu: Print VMX flags in /proc/cpuinfo using
 VMX_FEATURES_*
Message-ID: <20191212182721.GI3163@linux.intel.com>
References: <20191128014016.4389-12-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
 <20191212122646.GE4991@zn.tnic>
 <d0b21e7e-69f5-09f9-3e1c-14d49fa42b9f@redhat.com>
 <4A24DE75-4E68-4EC6-B3F3-4ACB0EE82BF0@oracle.com>
 <17c6569e-d0af-539c-6d63-f4c07367d8d1@redhat.com>
 <20191212174357.GE3163@linux.intel.com>
 <52dd758d-a590-52a6-4248-22d6852b75cd@redhat.com>
 <DA429131-7A4C-4B74-A020-6CE7622ED2F8@oracle.com>
 <CALMp9eRAYj=dKDtnPymkUA_OOMv+9a4WdPNt4hdpFtBgzwNA9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <EA5BE610-6E9C-4357-AD62-5678C7E81043@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <EA5BE610-6E9C-4357-AD62-5678C7E81043@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 08:04:19PM +0200, Liran Alon wrote:
> 
> 
> > On 12 Dec 2019, at 19:57, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 9:53 AM Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Why should CPU VMX features be treated differently than standard CPUID deduced features?
> > 
> > Do we have the right Intel people on the recipient list to answer this
> > question? Presumably, Intel felt that this information should be
> > available in supervisor mode only.
> > 
> > Sean?
> 
> Good question. Probably because it just makes sense that Ring3 will never need to use
> this info as all VMX instructions are privileged. i.e. Can only be executed in Ring0.

I highly doubt ring0 vs. ring3 was a motivating factor.  I suspect the MSR
interface is primarily driven by VMX's allowed-0 vs. allowed-1 behavior,
which would be awkward to encode in CPUID.  Reporting via MSR also likely
provided more flexibility for updating/fixing CPU behavior, e.g. patching
the RDMSR hook is likely far easier than patching CPUID.

Even if the architects intended the information to be supervisor-only,
that's just their opinion, no?

> De-facto in KVM we have discovered this assumption to be problematic BTW,
> as KVM created an interface to query VMX MSRs values to properly define the requested
> vCPU model. :P (See kvm_get_msr_feature())