Date:   Mon, 27 Feb 2023 14:03:58 -0800
From:   Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@intel.com>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>,
        "pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        "Shahar, Sagi" <sagis@google.com>,
        "Aktas, Erdem" <erdemaktas@google.com>,
        "isaku.yamahata@gmail.com" <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>,
        "dmatlack@google.com" <dmatlack@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 055/113] KVM: x86/VMX: introduce vmx tlb_remote_flush
 and tlb_remote_flush_with_range
Message-ID: <20230227220358.GQ4175971@ls.amr.corp.intel.com>
References: <cover.1673539699.git.isaku.yamahata@intel.com>
 <d69b281c23131254ae6fdea67e384ef931dbba8e.1673539699.git.isaku.yamahata@intel.com>
 <d98561f16056d919626a46f0d078b774e2d56445.camel@intel.com>
 <Y8bSpdplnlRus3lx@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <Y8bSpdplnlRus3lx@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 04:53:57PM +0000,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > On Thu, 2023-01-12 at 08:32 -0800, isaku.yamahata@intel.com wrote:
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > > @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static void kvm_flush_remote_tlbs_with_range(struct kvm *kvm,
> > >  {
> > >  	int ret = -ENOTSUPP;
> > >  
> > > -	if (range && kvm_x86_ops.tlb_remote_flush_with_range)
> > > +	if (range && kvm_available_flush_tlb_with_range())
> > >  		ret = static_call(kvm_x86_tlb_remote_flush_with_range)(kvm, range);
> > 
> > Again, IMHO this code change doesn't make code any clearer.  With the new code,
> > I need to go into the kvm_available_flush_tlb_with_range() to see what's going
> > on, but with the old code I don't.
> 
> Agreed.  Though I think this patch as a whole can be replaced with a more
> straightforward solution.
> 
> hv_remote_flush_tlb() is used when KVM is running as a Hyper-V guest, whereas
> TDX requires running KVM on bare metal.  KVM should simply disallow TDX when a
> hypervisor is detected, then there's no need for vmx_tlb_remote_flush_with_range().

Ok, I dropped this patch and add the check into hardware_setup().  If hyper-v
is enabled, disable tdx.
-- 
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>