Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.32 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.32;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <c858817d3e3be246a1a2278e3b42d06284e615e5.1700766316.git.maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>
 <ZWTQuRpwPkutHY-D@google.com> <9a8e3cb95f3e1a69092746668f9643a25723c522.camel@redhat.com>
 <b3aec42f-8aa7-4589-b984-a483a80e4a42@maciej.szmigiero.name>
In-Reply-To: <b3aec42f-8aa7-4589-b984-a483a80e4a42@maciej.szmigiero.name>
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Nov 2023 15:57:38 -0800
Message-ID: <CALMp9eQvLpYdq=2cYyOBERBh2G+xubo6Mb0crWO=dugpie4BRg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Allow XSAVES on CPUs where host doesn't use it
 due to an errata
To:     "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Cc:     Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 2:00=E2=80=AFPM Maciej S. Szmigiero
<mail@maciej.szmigiero.name> wrote:
> I think that if particular guest would work on bare metal it should
> work on "-cpu host" too - no tinkering should be required for such
> basic functionality as being able to successfully finish booting.

I disagree. Let's not focus on one particular erratum. If, for
whatever reason, the host kernel is booted with "noxsaves," I don't
think KVM should allow a guest to bypass that directive.