From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linutronix.de (193.142.43.55:993) by crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for ; 16 Oct 2019 21:07:45 -0000 Received: from esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com ([216.71.155.144]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1iKqWG-00045z-2D for speck@linutronix.de; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 23:07:44 +0200 Subject: [MODERATED] Re: EPT/IOMMU shattering on SNB References: <7fa1bd72-93d0-0196-01ea-66d12604604d@redhat.com> From: Andrew Cooper Message-ID: <32583abf-9f4f-7d78-094d-e9b03eaa2d5b@citrix.com> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 22:07:27 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7fa1bd72-93d0-0196-01ea-66d12604604d@redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="tUZpn8nifN1VuZ9kl6gFXHBTVXLeSCkqe"; protected-headers="v1" To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: --tUZpn8nifN1VuZ9kl6gFXHBTVXLeSCkqe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en-GB On 15/10/2019 20:38, speck for Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 14/10/19 14:50, speck for Andrew Cooper wrote: >> Avoiding sharing the EPT and IOMMU tables does avoid the problem, but >> that is to be expected as the shattering activity now has no interacti= on >> with the IOMMU. >> >> Has anyone experimented with the above scenario, and if so, how has >> testing gone? > Nope, sorry. KVM and VFIO do not share page tables. Thanks.=C2=A0 That's helpful to know.=C2=A0 I'll try and follow up direct= ly with folk at Intel. ~Andrew --tUZpn8nifN1VuZ9kl6gFXHBTVXLeSCkqe--