On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 12:04 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 16/02/2018 11:21, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > > Why? With IBRS_ALL the guest *never* gets to affect the actual hardware > > MSR, which is always on. The MSR is purely an emulated no-op. Why does > > that affect migration? > Because even if the host has IBRS_ALL, as long as you want to migrate to > a system without IBRS_ALL the guest will likely not have it.  You can > fake IBRS_ALL on the older system after migration, and forcing the guest > to always run with IBRS=1 even when in user mode; that is slow.  Or... No you can't; it's also a barrier. You can't just leave it on. > > Even if the guest doesn't have/support IBRS_ALL, and is frobbing the > > (now emulated) MSR on every kernel entry/exit, that's *still* going to > > be a metric shitload faster than what it *thought* it was doing. > > ... you are making every kernel entry/exit 3 times slower by adding two > KVM exits (both hypervisor traps and syscalls are in the 1000-1500 clock > cycles ballpark).  That cannot be fast at all. I'm not convinced I care. It's still on a par with the performance of *actually* frobbing IBRS every time. If the guest cares about performance, they'll be using retpoline instead and not doing that. We really don't want to penalise the *host*, and other guests, for one guest which does stupid things. And if we have a conditional 'set IBRS back on because we're using IBRS_ALL and the guest had access to it' in the vmexit path, only the *first* clause (IBRS_ALL) of that condition can be done with alternatives. The other part is necessarily a runtime thing, and thus needs the 'else lfence' to make sure it really happens, penalising *all* guests. (Unless there's something else guaranteed to be serialising in that path but after Arjan mentioned it last time I took a quick look and didn't see anything unconditional). An alternative would be to put the SPEC_CTRL MSR into the list of MSRs  to be automatically saved/reset at vmexit, but we've already carefully *changed* from doing that for the non-IBRS_ALL case because doing it manually in the host is faster. I don't know that we want that additional complexity — that might be the last straw that makes us tell Intel "no, in that case we don't want IBRS_ALL as it is. Define a new bit which is like IBRS_ALL but also promises that it's always like that and the IBRS bit in the MSR is a no-op". That new bit would be set on all future hardware except a small handful of current chips, I believe. I think we can live with trapping and emulating SPEC_CTRL for the guests which use it, for now. If we *really* want to explore optimising it somehow, there's nothing to prevent us doing that in a subsequent patch.