Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:39:19 -0700
From:   David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
To:     Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@google.com>
Cc:     x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
        shuah@kernel.org, bgardon@google.com, seanjc@google.com,
        oupton@google.com, peterx@redhat.com, vkuznets@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [V2 PATCH 4/8] KVM: selftests: x86: Precompute the result for
 is_{intel,amd}_cpu()
Message-ID: <YyuEhxW4URWVvHyW@google.com>
References: <20220915000448.1674802-1-vannapurve@google.com>
 <20220915000448.1674802-5-vannapurve@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220915000448.1674802-5-vannapurve@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 12:04:44AM +0000, Vishal Annapurve wrote:
> Cache the vendor CPU type in a global variable so that multiple calls
> to is_intel_cpu() do not need to re-execute CPUID.
> 
> Add cpu vendor check in kvm_hypercall() so that it executes correct
> vmcall/vmmcall instruction when running on Intel/AMD hosts. This avoids
> exit to KVM which anyway tries to patch the instruction according to
> the cpu type.

Out of curiousity, why do we want to avoid this exit?