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;
IronPort-SDR: VJA2ECPWJDqCFgi5fB4xh2J725WZPHI+9TtJogWQw9NpZ6jSfbo4Ik5QJqgom6Wwmb++VJlA0H
 QYAw5lHrZyMQ==
IronPort-SDR: 7yLk8WgFV8IulWqBll0qQ6AUNBY5g7xGXO9konAWwj4X58tWoOMfV0V8tuiQEym4OjOKV17AWd
 aLJRalIs5AIg==
Date:   Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:50:27 +0800
From:   Shuo A Liu <shuo.a.liu@intel.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Yu Wang <yu1.wang@intel.com>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
        Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>,
        Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/17] x86/acrn: Introduce an API to check if a VM is
 privileged
Message-ID: <20201104035027.GA17702@shuo-intel.sh.intel.com>
References: <20201019061803.13298-1-shuo.a.liu@intel.com>
 <20201019061803.13298-4-shuo.a.liu@intel.com>
 <20201102143707.GC15392@zn.tnic>
 <20201103062718.GD12408@shuo-intel.sh.intel.com>
 <20201103102538.GB6310@zn.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201103102538.GB6310@zn.tnic>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23)
Precedence: bulk

On Tue  3.Nov'20 at 11:25:38 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 02:27:18PM +0800, Shuo A Liu wrote:
>> The code just followed KVM style (see kvm_arch_para_features()).
>
>Do you see Documentation/virt/kvm/cpuid.rst?

OK. It documents the leaf number.

>
>Now where is yours explaining what your hypervisor is doing?

Currently, it is in arch/x86/include/asm/acrn.h.

>
>> I can change to use
>> 	cpuid_eax(acrn_cpuid_base() + 1)...
>> If you prefer to.
>
>Yes please.

Sure.

If the leaf numbers be documented explicitly (like kvm), i think i can
use them as eax of cpuid_eax() directly (back to your first comment).
	cpuid_eax(ACRN_CPUID_FEATURES)...

If you looking at implementation of acrn-hypervisor, you will found the
leaf number is hardcoded in the hypervisor. So, they also can be
documented explicitly.

>
>> hypervisor_cpuid_base() implies the base is variable, no? We use
>> this function to detect the base.
>
>Yes, but you need to document all that and make it clear and
>understandable. If Linux is supposed to run as an acrn guest, that
>interface better be documented just like KVM does.

OK. I can add a similar cpuid.rst for acrn.

>
>Also, if there's a bug in the KVM guest/host interface, we might be able
>to fix it modulo ABI. Is that possible with acrn?
>
>I'm guessing the answer to that is yes if I'm looking at
>
>https://github.com/projectacrn/acrn-hypervisor
>
>?

Yes. Fix patches are always welcome.

>
>> OK. Then i will define acrn_cpuid_base() as a static inline function
>> in asm/acrn.h for callers.
>
>Yah, that function is simple enough.


Thanks
shuo