From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com, dave.hansen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: Support "Enhanced IBRS" on future CPUs
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 11:41:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <02bd3fdd-1b73-6cab-fb09-38ba933396bd@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1518518198.12890.48.camel@infradead.org>
On 13/02/2018 11:36, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>> - if the VM has IBRS_ALL, pass through the MSR when it is zero and
>>> intercept writes when it is one (no writes should happen)
>>>
>>> - if the VM doesn't have IBRS_ALL, do as we are doing now, independent
>>> of what the host spectre_v2_ibrs_all() setting is.
>> We end up having to turn IBRS on again on vmexit then, taking care that
>> no conditional branch can go round it. So that becomes an
>> *unconditional* wrmsr or lfence in the vmexit path. We really don't
>> want that.
>
> Note that being able to keep it simple in KVM was basically what made
> the difference between me tolerating IBRS_ALL as Intel currently define
> it, and throwing my toys out of the pram (as I had done in the first
> iterations of this patch).
You have my vote. :) Really, IBRS_ALL makes no sense and it would be
nice to know _why_ Intel is pushing something that makes no sense.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-13 10:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-12 15:27 [PATCH 1/2] x86/speculation: Correct Speculation Control microcode blacklist again David Woodhouse
2018-02-12 15:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: Support "Enhanced IBRS" on future CPUs David Woodhouse
2018-02-13 7:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-02-13 8:12 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-13 8:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-02-13 8:15 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-13 9:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-02-13 10:21 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-13 10:36 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-13 10:41 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2018-02-13 10:53 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-13 10:55 ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-02-16 9:58 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-16 10:08 ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-02-16 10:21 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-16 11:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2018-02-16 12:10 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-15 15:21 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=02bd3fdd-1b73-6cab-fb09-38ba933396bd@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).