Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200603203303.28545-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
 <46f57aa8-e278-b4fd-7ac8-523836308051@intel.com> <20200604151638.GD30223@linux.intel.com>
 <f7a234a7-664b-9160-f467-48b807d47c8b@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <f7a234a7-664b-9160-f467-48b807d47c8b@redhat.com>
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Jun 2020 09:44:34 -0700
Message-ID: <CALMp9eQoKJg36AabLErekJ-U10-DkRHW=dn14q0bxQHh7XrGMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Always treat MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES as a
 valid PMU MSR
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        "Xu, Like" <like.xu@intel.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 9:20 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 04/06/20 17:16, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 09:37:59AM +0800, Xu, Like wrote:
> >> On 2020/6/4 4:33, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> >>> Unconditionally return true when querying the validity of
> >>> MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES so as to defer the validity check to
> >>> intel_pmu_{get,set}_msr(), which can properly give the MSR a pass whe=
n
> >>> the access is initiated from host userspace.
> >> Regardless of=C3=83=E2=80=9A=C3=82  the MSR is emulated or not, is it =
a really good assumption that
> >> the guest cpuids are not properly ready when we do initialization from=
 host
> >> userspace
> >> ?
> >
> > I don't know if I would call it a "good assumption" so much as a "neces=
sary
> > assumption".  KVM_{GET,SET}_MSRS are allowed, and must function correct=
ly,
> > if they're called prior to KVM_SET_CPUID{2}.
>
> Generally speaking this is not the case for the PMU; get_gp_pmc for
> example depends on pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters which is initialized based
> on CPUID leaf 0xA.
>
> The assumption that this patch fixes is that you can blindly take the
> output of KVM_GET_MSR_INDEX_LIST and pass it to KVM_{GET,SET}_MSRS.

Is that an assumption or an invariant?