From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87691C433E0 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:50:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EF6364D9F for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:50:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0EF6364D9F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:40170 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lEbpP-0007Zc-39 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 12:50:31 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56966) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lEbnC-0006Yo-Pr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 12:48:15 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:34152) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lEbn8-0008A6-O7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 12:48:14 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1614102489; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=WbpVGPxzIIx0ZiX0lgwyGVmtk+ctiSeUZE5In2MMFLY=; b=KEuvouWEnLf/A1I9WDkEryFmh/Mov0IHAEDh64cWmtlAH97L/SDNGXFQBrQLjyUYGU6hoT 6b1lyWZPBjtdS0XD9ozZ5jG8v11vWbIJXndOJA8RgMXEGnIo0HcslBtcykmccINwD52cy6 Ssm0IeRTekBMgpedte7E3NC2ac7M060= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-553-NPYVyY1wNVKTbo2-odB0CA-1; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 12:48:07 -0500 X-MC-Unique: NPYVyY1wNVKTbo2-odB0CA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CA68107ACE4 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:48:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.40.208.64]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A5E6FEF0; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:48:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2021 18:48:02 +0100 From: Igor Mammedov To: Vitaly Kuznetsov Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement Message-ID: <20210223184802.7080da4a@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <871rd6yefp.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> References: <20210210164033.607612-1-vkuznets@redhat.com> <20210210164033.607612-17-vkuznets@redhat.com> <20210211183555.2136b5c8@redhat.com> <87tuqhllmn.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20210212151259.3db7406f@redhat.com> <87k0rdl3er.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20210212170113.30a902b2@redhat.com> <87eehhlnj5.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20210215180106.7e573e6a@redhat.com> <87sg5xjj60.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <87mtvw4d59.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20210223161948.56bf86c0@redhat.com> <871rd6yefp.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=imammedo@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=imammedo@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Paolo Bonzini , drjones@redhat.com, Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eduardo Habkost Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 16:46:50 +0100 Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Igor Mammedov writes: > > > On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 11:20:34 +0100 > > Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > > > >> Vitaly Kuznetsov writes: > >> > >> > Igor Mammedov writes: > >> > > >> >>> > >> >>> We need to distinguish because that would be sane. > >> >>> > >> >>> Enlightened VMCS is an extension to VMX, it can't be used without > >> >>> it. Genuine Hyper-V doesn't have a knob for enabling and disabling it, > >> >> ... > >> >>> That bein said, if > >> >>> guest CPU lacks VMX it is counter-productive to expose EVMCS. However, > >> >>> there is a problem with explicit enablement: what should > >> >>> > >> >>> 'hv-passthrough,hv-evmcs' option do? Just silently drop EVMCS? Doesn't > >> >>> sound sane to me. > >> >> based on above I'd error out is user asks for unsupported option > >> >> i.e. no VMX -> no hv-evmcs - if explicitly asked -> error out > >> > > >> > That's what I keep telling you but you don't seem to listen. 'Scratch > >> > CPU' can't possibly help with this use-case because when you parse > >> > > >> > 'hv-passthrough,hv-evmcs,vmx=off' you > >> > > >> > 1) "hv-passthrough" -> set EVMCS bit to '1' as it is supported by the > >> > host. > >> > > >> > 2) 'hv-evmcs' -> keep EVMCS bit '1' > >> > > >> > 3) 'vmx=off' -> you have no idea where EVMCS bit came from. > >> > > >> > We have to remember which options were aquired from the host and which > >> > were set explicitly by the user. > >> > >> Igor, > >> > >> could you please comment on the above? In case my line of thought is > >> correct, and it is impossible to distinguish between e.g. > >> > >> 'hv-passthrough,hv-evmcs,-vmx' > >> and > >> 'hv-passthrough,-vmx' > >> > >> without a custom parser (written just exactly the way I did in this > >> version, for example) regardless of when 'hv-passthrough' is > >> expanded. E.g. we have the exact same problem with > >> 'hv-default,hv-evmcs,-vmx'. I that case I see no point in discussing > > > > right, if we need to distinguish between explicit and implicit hv-evmcs set by > > hv-passthrough custom parser probably the way to go. > > > > However do we need actually need to do it? > > I think we really need that. See below ... > > > I'd treat 'hv-passthrough,-vmx' the same way as 'hv-passthrough,hv-evmcs,-vmx' > > and it applies not only hv-evmcs but other features hv-passthrough might set > > (i.e. if whatever was [un]set by hv-passthrough in combination with other > > features results in invalid config, QEMU shall error out instead of magically > > altering host provided hv-passthrough value). > > > > something like: > > 'hv-passthrough,-vmx' when hv-passthrough makes hv-evmcs bit set > > should result in > > error_setg(errp,"'vmx' feature can't be disabled when hv-evmcs is enabled," > > " either enable 'vmx' or disable 'hv-evmcs' along with disabling 'vmx'" > > > > making host's features set, *magically* mutable, depending on other user provided features > > is a bit confusing. One would never know what hv-passthrough actually means, and if > > enabling/disabling 'random' feature changes it. > > > > It's cleaner to do just what user asked (whether implicitly or explicitly) and error out > > in case it ends up in nonsense configuration. > > > > I don't seem to agree this is a sane behavior, especially if you replace > 'hv-passthrough' with 'hv-default' above. Removing 'vmx' from CPU for > Windows guests is common if you'd want to avoid nested configuration: > even without any Hyper-V guests created, Windows itself is a Hyper-V > partition. > > So a sane user will do: > > '-cpu host,hv-default,vmx=off' > > and on Intel he will get an error, and on AMD he won't. > > So what you're suggesting actually defeats the whole purpose of > 'hv-default' as upper-layer tools (think libvirt) will need to know that I'd assume it would be hard for libvirt to use 'hv-default' from migration point of view. It's semi opaque (one can find out what features it sets indirectly inspecting individual hv_foo features, and mgmt will need to know about them). If it will mutate when other features [un]set, upper layers might need to enumerate all these permutations to know which hosts are compatible or compare host feature sets every time before attempting migration. > Intel configurations for Windows guests are somewhat different. They'll > need to know what 'hv-evmcs' is. We're back to where we've started. we were talking about hv-passthrough, and if host advertises hv-evmcs QEMU should complain if user disabled features it depends on ( not silently fixing up configuration error). But the same applies to hv-default. > If we are to follow this approach let's just throw away 'hv-evmcs' from > 'hv-default' set, it's going to be much cleaner. But again, I don't > really believe it's the right way to go. if desired behavior, on Intel host for above config, to start without error then indeed defaults should not set 'hv-evmcs' if it results in invalid feature set.