Date:   Mon, 30 Jan 2023 14:42:09 +0800
From:   Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
To:     Kechen Lu <kechenl@nvidia.com>
CC:     <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, <seanjc@google.com>, <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        <zhi.wang.linux@gmail.com>, <shaoqin.huang@intel.com>,
        <vkuznets@redhat.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v6 5/6] KVM: x86: add vCPU scoped toggling for
 disabled exits
Message-ID: <Y9dmwQNS1qufVwYZ@gao-cwp>
References: <20230121020738.2973-1-kechenl@nvidia.com>
 <20230121020738.2973-6-kechenl@nvidia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230121020738.2973-6-kechenl@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?oQ6LZ0cY7JG2VqNmKJpGx79HjCUEm22Xp5OTEPfydGCmgthhcjmhkrZtSaCP?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?SupdpWlEZAoa8NogyUnwLegF7yfe2hmHisQHp3iOsfjEFwODU15eNRnjhD2R?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?gu/+LpWNKVt+YKagd6RtYuqMUsn8tgvDW+8HOWyxpTX6daNNX3gmrYdl/YA2?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?R0Qf+rI/9KrW9Hbrjo0YjnIifrcWbWElzCDfdH8X8F0/3oXtCm2ynaJOYty6?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Qvy4EM3m1G0JTw34ghboTO/t5QQ8idMlWJoBJk0+wBYHhEPRpL5x3+vI6iUf?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?83NFCZCjaBQC2Qzl5kn/abITcUWDysTSHkUBorMdbHGoqP/Ihp7AD5wKYFhm?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?fOcBoAWfrocSl8uAg29vpp7RP9af0fxiKajY+vZ+7JIv9MdO7l55dhJ++bld?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?n+JhfaJrBi39ssNlcTXUimfeqoxz4o1yeankri7tUQFuMkSNICaRzifklNUu?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?5QB279B52d9kZP0mzBCyQfOR9OaWs9gn4lO1Rx9H58SqqV0k4DQ1Fkd/z+vs?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?RM5nTUWIJMxWKaAaGi5ZxqkxtOg/ImwI46e86eA6Vj8+EMXlo4fa4a+0sS34?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?vpcrEBUcGhwKeEa8Z77tHF9XWxY3xZKmtwTMAnyCVNUmB2bBh7wMYIESv9XF?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?WHpMqpONeEU+YNVdjor/JJXxLlwnzK9890eRQOuN4gcXtoRJKb2w+M9vbKLH?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?aQpshKPt8ZdX2FJL11GKWHr2YLN1uJM08ntwVP2xHFU7JROHAUCI/0fulgQm?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?k7dPMunL2Iol+HdN0eBZAZg7uenGuJS253uTTBpgXRGNUoMD3vVKBvEcEWWv?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?FeDwgQgcjVWegyWufhww2GQsvXwgnBo6v5Ue2/9t1TnGJkToPNcaAbvzde/r?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Xu6AjFFqNNbsF9r2aSqwvCvsalFJyOqWWUn2C2RYFqZgZANY3xLdlMXyyKHs?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?C3U/mK/56xc35TzHGUiKDFt60l3X8NzzXNL8hFtcpaSxyEhkd31HRMZDV6pb?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?PlhlazYaKKkb5S6ocfOF0ApVuZYPaie2SiaRo4A+SFYw+PguyCN09O/h8KAq?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?+gDpsrBpocU/LL5DZ+nuXfJq6o/R5W2UbmW7yyvX8qgfZlus2xPA/nF7UQ8u?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?e2VS2/Jo+whnxAhPbEYxJO4/hDx7GI9FW3kz4xk1TyCRFmFzwVQfhcAjw1RE?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?S1EOYad+adjh34sb3UZOk0UDkwsit3xhxFmjA+KIuKFvCUfcmZNSriftmQDc?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?4aGxL9vseEGLwcXapiPwaeiRA6M3WrDRstp4jpv+Ms+qme5MGbfXVUUuJ5gM?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?pQJBk2XnoU8XNP9xWFjhL7pw49rg9jbD2T/DnINKj/0MChYOPFUDMZnUvto3?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?sBO54tsoYYwdpvFh0Eks/aePgt+1lx7+CY+RtFppPQ/nK0/nl97v8xpEgYKe?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?hoIx2d8yPDeMJZdVuhXOa3BI5qPTQGohRkD+emBF1U3/yJZRfWvucSkiiv4y?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?QWkNdOfr6UyyxatYqf1tBFkReA6aCTEkXP4mLt5GQvyjhj8vTi14Jtoz8kkG?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?A3hNrBzhcDzkCyh+duhpXOB4Ml//KmDnCvRS6gqB?=
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 3129ccdc-3542-4944-814c-08db028d13a7
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: PH8PR11MB6780.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jan 2023 06:41:54.7708
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: HjLLqR+b8YtUjPZK70MrXoKgC1jd+ZQ3PKXxKGIXVZ6SCWnZtoR80swIsoCqNeDY8lQSZbGp5XWbKq+gC5y1Iw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL1PR11MB5238
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 02:07:37AM +0000, Kechen Lu wrote:
>+static void svm_update_disabled_exits(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)

Is it possible to call this function on vCPU creation, i.e., consolidate
initialization and runtime toggling?

>+{
>+	struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
>+	struct vmcb_control_area *control = &svm->vmcb->control;
>+
>+	if (kvm_hlt_in_guest(vcpu))
>+		svm_clr_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_HLT);
>+	else
>+		svm_set_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_HLT);
>+
>+	if (kvm_mwait_in_guest(vcpu)) {
>+		svm_clr_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_MONITOR);
>+		svm_clr_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_MWAIT);
>+	} else {
>+		svm_set_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_MONITOR);
>+		svm_set_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_MWAIT);
>+	}
>+
>+	if (kvm_pause_in_guest(vcpu)) {
>+		svm_clr_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_PAUSE);
>+	} else {
>+		control->pause_filter_count = pause_filter_count;
>+		if (pause_filter_thresh)
>+			control->pause_filter_thresh = pause_filter_thresh;
>+	}
>+}
>+
> static void svm_vm_destroy(struct kvm *kvm)
> {
> 	avic_vm_destroy(kvm);
>@@ -4825,7 +4852,10 @@ static struct kvm_x86_ops svm_x86_ops __initdata = {
> 	.complete_emulated_msr = svm_complete_emulated_msr,
> 
> 	.vcpu_deliver_sipi_vector = svm_vcpu_deliver_sipi_vector,
>+
> 	.vcpu_get_apicv_inhibit_reasons = avic_vcpu_get_apicv_inhibit_reasons,
>+
>+	.update_disabled_exits = svm_update_disabled_exits,
> };
> 
> /*
>diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
>index 019a20029878..f5137afdd424 100644
>--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
>+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
>@@ -8070,6 +8070,41 @@ static void vmx_vm_destroy(struct kvm *kvm)
> 	free_pages((unsigned long)kvm_vmx->pid_table, vmx_get_pid_table_order(kvm));
> }
> 
>+static void vmx_update_disabled_exits(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)

ditto.