From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>,
Michael Kelley <mikelley@microsoft.com>,
linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] KVM: x86: Introduce CPUID_8000_0007_EDX 'scattered' leaf
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 17:53:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YyyhBTXdj96crwbZ@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALMp9eSVQSMKbYKr0n-t3JP58hLGA8ZHJZAX34-E4YWUa+VYHA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022, Jim Mattson wrote:
> Why do we need a new 'scattered' leaf? We are only using two bits in
> the first one, right? And now we're only going to use one bit in the
> second one?
>
> I thought the point of the 'scattered' leaves was to collect a bunch
> of feature bits from different CPUID leaves in a single feature word.
>
> Allocating a new feature word for one or two bits seems extravagant.
Ah, these leafs aren't scattered from KVM's perspective.
The scattered terminology comes from the kernel side, where the KVM-only leafs
_may_ be used to deal with features that are scattered by the kernel. But there
is no requirement that KVM-only leafs _must_ be scattered by the kernel, e.g. we
can and should use this for leafs that KVM wants to expose to the guest, but are
completely ignored by the kernel. Intel's PSFD feature flag is a good example.
A better shortlog would be:
KVM: x86: Add a KVM-only leaf for CPUID_8000_0007_EDX
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-22 17:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-22 14:36 [PATCH v4 0/6] KVM: x86: Hyper-V invariant TSC control feature Vitaly Kuznetsov
2022-09-22 14:36 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] x86/hyperv: Add HV_INVARIANT_TSC_EXPOSED define Vitaly Kuznetsov
2022-09-22 22:07 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-09-22 14:36 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] KVM: x86: Introduce CPUID_8000_0007_EDX 'scattered' leaf Vitaly Kuznetsov
2022-09-22 17:09 ` Jim Mattson
2022-09-22 17:53 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2022-09-22 17:55 ` Jim Mattson
2022-10-11 19:15 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-09-22 14:36 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] KVM: x86: Hyper-V invariant TSC control Vitaly Kuznetsov
2022-09-22 14:36 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] KVM: selftests: Rename 'msr->availble' to 'msr->fault_exepected' in hyperv_features test Vitaly Kuznetsov
2022-10-11 19:18 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-09-22 14:36 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] KVM: selftests: Convert hyperv_features test to using KVM_X86_CPU_FEATURE() Vitaly Kuznetsov
2022-09-22 14:36 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] KVM: selftests: Test Hyper-V invariant TSC control Vitaly Kuznetsov
2022-10-11 19:40 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-12 12:40 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2022-10-12 16:52 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-13 9:16 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
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=YyyhBTXdj96crwbZ@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikelley@microsoft.com \
--cc=mlevitsk@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
/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).