Re: [RFC] Add kernel-doc test script

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 08:32:35AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 11/18/20 5:03 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 04:23:49PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > >> On 11/17/20 2:36 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >>> Add a kernel-doc test scri

Re: [RFC] Add kernel-doc test script

On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 04:23:49PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 11/17/20 2:36 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > Add a kernel-doc test script to tools/testing/kernel-doc. > > > > radix_tree_lookup_slot test case provided by Matthew Wilcox. > > > > Signed-off-by

Re: [RFC] Add kernel-doc test script

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 09:21:11AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 17/11/20 23:36, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > +# the -man output includes the build date > > +export KBUILD_BUILD_TIMESTAMP=1991-08-25 > > Nice :) > > > +ok=yes > > + > > +# don't eve

[RFC] Add kernel-doc test script

Add a kernel-doc test script to tools/testing/kernel-doc. radix_tree_lookup_slot test case provided by Matthew Wilcox. Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost --- tools/testing/kernel-doc/test-case.h | 111 ++ .../testing/kernel-doc/test-case.man.expected | 150

Re: [PATCH 2/2] kernel-doc: Handle function typedefs without asterisks

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:39:12PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 03:21:06PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 15:47:13 +0100 > > Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > > From: Eduardo Habkost > > > > > > Exam

Re: [PATCH] target/i386: add -cpu,lbr=true support to enable guest LBR

On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 10:51:03PM +0800, Xu, Like wrote: > Hi Eduardo, > > Thanks for your detailed review. > > On 2020/9/25 6:05, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > I've just noticed this on my review queue (apologies for the long > > delay). Comments below: > >

Re: [PATCH] target/i386: add -cpu,lbr=true support to enable guest LBR

e without lbr_fmt values OR, > - the requested guest vcpu model doesn't support PDCM. > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini > Cc: Richard Henderson > Cc: Eduardo Habkost > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" > Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum > Cc: Marcelo Tosatti > Cc: qemu-de...@nongnu.org > Sig

Re: [PATCH 2/3] KVM: x86: always expose VIRT_SSBD to guests

CPUs. Make this apparent in the > result of KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID as well. > > While at it, reuse X86_FEATURE_* constants for the SVM leaf too. > > However, we need to hide the bit on Intel processors, so move > the setting to svm_set_supported_cpuid. > > Cc: Konrad Rz

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: always expose VIRT_SSBD to guests

CPUs. Make this apparent in the > result of KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID as well. > > Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > Reported-by: Eduardo Habkost > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini > --- > arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 10 ++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >

Re: [PATCH v7 2/3] KVM: vmx: Emulate MSR IA32_UMWAIT_CONTROL

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 04:29:06PM +0800, Tao Xu wrote: > UMWAIT and TPAUSE instructions use IA32_UMWAIT_CONTROL at MSR index E1H > to determines the maximum time in TSC-quanta that the processor can reside > in either C0.1 or C0.2. > > This patch emulates MSR IA32_UMWAIT_CONTROL in guest and

Re: [PATCH -v2] target-i386: Reenable RDTSCP support on Opteron_G[345] CPU models CPU models

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 09:08:03PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 05:52:35PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > Why did you remove this entry from PC_COMPAT_2_4? > > > > We must keep compatibility with old behavior of Opteron_G2 on > > pc-2.

[PATCH] kvm: x86: Add AMD's EX_CFG to the list of ignored MSRs

BIOS and Kernel Developer's Guide (BKDG) for AMD Family 15h Models 00h-0Fh Processors". Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost --- arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h | 1 + arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h b/arch/x86/inc

Re: [PATCH] target-i386: Reenable RDTSCP support on Opteron_G[345] CPU models

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 05:14:40PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > + qemu-devel. > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:30:17PM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > Great, then, this is a non-issue - we just need to mention that fact > > in the commit that sets the min version for the kernel > > Ok,

Re: kvm: RDTSCP on AMD

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:38:39AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 06:08:43PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 08:42:58PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 05:06:00PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wro

Re: kvm: RDTSCP on AMD

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 08:42:58PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 05:06:00PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > I mean documenting it. We already have code that will print > > warnings if a feature isn't available. > > > > See my previous atte

Re: kvm: RDTSCP on AMD

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 07:41:53PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 04:37:30PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > It isn't as simply as reverting commit 33b5e8c03ae7, but we can > > surely re-add RDTSCP on pc-*-4.0 and newer. > > Sure. If yo

Re: kvm: RDTSCP on AMD

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 07:41:53PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 04:37:30PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > It isn't as simply as reverting commit 33b5e8c03ae7, but we can > > surely re-add RDTSCP on pc-*-4.0 and newer. > > Sure. If yo

Re: kvm: RDTSCP on AMD

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 07:13:28PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > Reviving an old thread here. > > On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 11:27:16PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 06/07/2016 19:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > >> > Nothing is needed in the kernel actuall

Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: Report STIBP on GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID

On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:02:06PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:19:56PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > Months ago, we have added code to allow direct access to MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL > > to the guest, which makes STIBP available to guests. This

Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: Report STIBP on GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID

On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:02:06PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:19:56PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > Months ago, we have added code to allow direct access to MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL > > to the guest, which makes STIBP available to guests. This

[PATCH] kvm: x86: Report STIBP on GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID

w direct access to MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL"). However, we never updated GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID to let userspace know that STIBP can be enabled in CPUID. Fix that by updating kvm_cpuid_8000_0008_ebx_x86_features and kvm_cpuid_7_0_edx_x86_features. Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost --- arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 4 ++-

[PATCH] kvm: x86: Report STIBP on GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID

w direct access to MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL"). However, we never updated GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID to let userspace know that STIBP can be enabled in CPUID. Fix that by updating kvm_cpuid_8000_0008_ebx_x86_features and kvm_cpuid_7_0_edx_x86_features. Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost --- arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 4 ++-

[tip:perf/core] perf python: More portable way to make CFLAGS work with clang

Commit-ID: 8b2f245faa6238e28a1d801e8633515251d1acfc Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/8b2f245faa6238e28a1d801e8633515251d1acfc Author: Eduardo Habkost AuthorDate: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 17:40:58 -0300 Committer: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo CommitDate: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 14:30:45 -0300 perf python

[tip:perf/core] perf python: More portable way to make CFLAGS work with clang

Commit-ID: 8b2f245faa6238e28a1d801e8633515251d1acfc Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/8b2f245faa6238e28a1d801e8633515251d1acfc Author: Eduardo Habkost AuthorDate: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 17:40:58 -0300 Committer: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo CommitDate: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 14:30:45 -0300 perf python

[tip:perf/core] perf python: Make clang_has_option() work on Python 3

Commit-ID: e13a5d69c31d35538e80176d54d95b6addf4dcbf Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/e13a5d69c31d35538e80176d54d95b6addf4dcbf Author: Eduardo Habkost AuthorDate: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 17:40:57 -0300 Committer: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo CommitDate: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 14:30:44 -0300 perf python

[tip:perf/core] perf python: Make clang_has_option() work on Python 3

Commit-ID: e13a5d69c31d35538e80176d54d95b6addf4dcbf Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/e13a5d69c31d35538e80176d54d95b6addf4dcbf Author: Eduardo Habkost AuthorDate: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 17:40:57 -0300 Committer: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo CommitDate: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 14:30:44 -0300 perf python

[PATCH 1/2] perf: Make clang_has_option() work on Python 3

Use a bytes literal so it works with Python 3's version of Popen(). Note that the b"..." syntax requires Python 2.6+. Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost --- tools/perf/util/setup.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/util/setup.py b/tools

[PATCH 2/2] perf: More portable way to make CFLAGS work with clang

-by: Eduardo Habkost --- tools/perf/util/setup.py | 14 -- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/util/setup.py b/tools/perf/util/setup.py index 261a55e7e1b2..63f758c655d5 100644 --- a/tools/perf/util/setup.py +++ b/tools/perf/util/setup.py @@ -9,12 +9,14

[PATCH 1/2] perf: Make clang_has_option() work on Python 3

Use a bytes literal so it works with Python 3's version of Popen(). Note that the b"..." syntax requires Python 2.6+. Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost --- tools/perf/util/setup.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/util/setup.py b/tools

[PATCH 2/2] perf: More portable way to make CFLAGS work with clang

-by: Eduardo Habkost --- tools/perf/util/setup.py | 14 -- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/util/setup.py b/tools/perf/util/setup.py index 261a55e7e1b2..63f758c655d5 100644 --- a/tools/perf/util/setup.py +++ b/tools/perf/util/setup.py @@ -9,12 +9,14

[PATCH 0/2] tools/perf: Python 3 + clang build fixes

This series contains a couple fixes to make it possible to build perf with Python 3 and clang. Eduardo Habkost (2): perf: Make clang_has_option() work on Python 3 perf: More portable way to make CFLAGS work with clang tools/perf/util/setup.py | 16 +--- 1 file changed, 9

[PATCH 0/2] tools/perf: Python 3 + clang build fixes

This series contains a couple fixes to make it possible to build perf with Python 3 and clang. Eduardo Habkost (2): perf: Make clang_has_option() work on Python 3 perf: More portable way to make CFLAGS work with clang tools/perf/util/setup.py | 16 +--- 1 file changed, 9

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/split_lock: Enumerate #AC exception for split locked access feature

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 06:23:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jun 2018, Dave Hansen wrote: > > On 06/29/2018 07:33 AM, Fenghua Yu wrote: > > > +/* Detect feature of #AC for split lock by probing bit 29 in > > > MSR_TEST_CTL. */ > > > +void detect_ac_split_lock(void) > > > +{ > > >

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/split_lock: Enumerate #AC exception for split locked access feature

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 06:23:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jun 2018, Dave Hansen wrote: > > On 06/29/2018 07:33 AM, Fenghua Yu wrote: > > > +/* Detect feature of #AC for split lock by probing bit 29 in > > > MSR_TEST_CTL. */ > > > +void detect_ac_split_lock(void) > > > +{ > > >

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 07:18:57PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 18/05/2018 19:13, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >> As much as we'd like to be helpful and validate input, you need a real > >> time host too. I'm not sure how we'd find out - I suggest we do not > >> b

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 07:18:57PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 18/05/2018 19:13, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >> As much as we'd like to be helpful and validate input, you need a real > >> time host too. I'm not sure how we'd find out - I suggest we do not > >> b

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 08:01:49PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 01:04:31PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > CCing qemu-devel, as I'm now discussing userspace. > > > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:55:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 08:01:49PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 01:04:31PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > CCing qemu-devel, as I'm now discussing userspace. > > > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:55:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

CCing qemu-devel, as I'm now discussing userspace. On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:55:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 03:46:58PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 05:54:24PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > HIN

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

CCing qemu-devel, as I'm now discussing userspace. On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:55:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 03:46:58PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 05:54:24PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > HIN

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 05:54:24PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > HINTS_DEDICATED seems to be somewhat confusing: > > Guest doesn't really care whether it's the only task running on a host > CPU as long as it's not preempted. > > And there are more reasons for Guest to be preempted than host

Re: [PATCH] kvm: rename HINTS_DEDICATED to KVM_HINTS_REALTIME

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 05:54:24PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > HINTS_DEDICATED seems to be somewhat confusing: > > Guest doesn't really care whether it's the only task running on a host > CPU as long as it's not preempted. > > And there are more reasons for Guest to be preempted than host

Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 02:58:49PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:36:37PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 18/04/2018 11:03, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > >>> QEMU setting ucode_rev automatically using the host value when > > >&

Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 02:58:49PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:36:37PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 18/04/2018 11:03, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > >>> QEMU setting ucode_rev automatically using the host value when > > >&

Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:24:22AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > 2018-04-18 4:24 GMT+08:00 Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com>: > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:40:58PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > >> Cc Eduardo, > >> 2018-02-26 20:41 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini <pbonz.

Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:24:22AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > 2018-04-18 4:24 GMT+08:00 Eduardo Habkost : > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:40:58PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > >> Cc Eduardo, > >> 2018-02-26 20:41 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > >> > On

Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:40:58PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > Cc Eduardo, > 2018-02-26 20:41 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > > On 26/02/2018 13:22, Borislav Petkov wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:18:07PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > In this context, "host-initiated"

Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 06:40:58PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > Cc Eduardo, > 2018-02-26 20:41 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > > On 26/02/2018 13:22, Borislav Petkov wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:18:07PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > In this context, "host-initiated" write means written by

Re: [PATCH v2] target-i386: add KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED performance hint

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:13:21PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > Hi Eduardo, > 2018-03-09 22:16 GMT+08:00 Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com>: > > On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:15:25AM -0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > >> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpen...@tencent.com> > >>

Re: [PATCH v2] target-i386: add KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED performance hint

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:13:21PM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > Hi Eduardo, > 2018-03-09 22:16 GMT+08:00 Eduardo Habkost : > > On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:15:25AM -0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: > >> From: Wanpeng Li > >> > >> Add KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED performa

Re: [PATCH v2] target-i386: add KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED performance hint

cks. > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrc...@redhat.com> > Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpen...@tencent.com> > --- > v1 -> v2: > * add a new feature word > >

Re: [PATCH v2] target-i386: add KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED performance hint

Bonzini > Cc: Radim Krčmář > Cc: Eduardo Habkost > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li > --- > v1 -> v2: > * add a new feature word > > target/i386/cpu.c | 14 ++ > target/i386/cpu.h | 3 +++ > target/i386/kvm.c | 4 > 3 files changed, 21 insert

Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] KVM: Introduce dedicated vCPUs hint KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 11:29:44AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: [...] > +KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED|| 0 || guest checks this feature bit > + || || to determine if they run on > dedicated > + || || vCPUs,

Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] KVM: Introduce dedicated vCPUs hint KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 11:29:44AM +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote: [...] > +KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED|| 0 || guest checks this feature bit > + || || to determine if they run on > dedicated > + || || vCPUs,

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] KVM: x86: Add dedicated vCPU hint KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED

> PV_DEDICATED = 0, PV_UNHALT = 1: default is Hybrid PV queued/unfair lock > PV_DEDICATED = 0, PV_UNHALT = 0: default is tas > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrc...@redhat.com> > Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> >

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] KVM: x86: Add dedicated vCPU hint KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED

UNHALT = 1: default is Hybrid PV queued/unfair lock > PV_DEDICATED = 0, PV_UNHALT = 0: default is tas > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini > Cc: Radim Krčmář > Cc: Eduardo Habkost > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li > --- > v1 -> v2: > * update to KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED > > Documentatio

Re: [PATCH v2] target-i386: add KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED performance hint

cks. > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrc...@redhat.com> > Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpen...@tencent.com> [...] > +[FEAT_KVM_HINTS] = { > +.feat_names = { >

Re: [PATCH v2] target-i386: add KVM_HINTS_DEDICATED performance hint

Bonzini > Cc: Radim Krčmář > Cc: Eduardo Habkost > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li [...] > +[FEAT_KVM_HINTS] = { > +.feat_names = { > +"hint-dedicated", NULL, NULL, NULL, > +NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, > +NULL,

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:15:50AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2018, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > > > On 30 Jan 2018, at 21:46, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > >> If you are ever going to migrate to Skylake, I think you should just > > >> always tell

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:15:50AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2018, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: > > > On 30 Jan 2018, at 21:46, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > >> If you are ever going to migrate to Skylake, I think you should just > > >> always tell the guests that you're

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 02:04:49PM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Borislav Petkov (b...@suse.de) wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:30:36PM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > Indeed, it's only for this weird case where you suddenly need to change > > > it. > > > > No, there's

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 02:04:49PM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Borislav Petkov (b...@suse.de) wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:30:36PM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > Indeed, it's only for this weird case where you suddenly need to change > > > it. > > > > No, there's

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 07:32:06PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Arjan van de Ven > wrote: > > > > the most simple solution is that we set the internal feature bit in Linux > > to turn on the "stuff the RSB" workaround is we're on a SKL

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 07:32:06PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Arjan van de Ven > wrote: > > > > the most simple solution is that we set the internal feature bit in Linux > > to turn on the "stuff the RSB" workaround is we're on a SKL *or* as a guest > > in a

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 02:25:12PM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote: > > I agree with your point that the common hypervisor practice to fake > old model numbers will break some of the workarounds. Hypervisors > may need to revisit their practice. > > > > In general, making these kinds of decisions based

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 02:25:12PM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote: > > I agree with your point that the common hypervisor practice to fake > old model numbers will break some of the workarounds. Hypervisors > may need to revisit their practice. > > > > In general, making these kinds of decisions based

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 01:20:52AM +, David Dunn wrote: > Eduardo, > > This is why it would be good to have a CPUID bit that says: > "apply SkyLake RSB stuffing." That's preferable to "trust FMS" > for VMware. Agreed it would be more useful than "trust FMS". However, I believe a "no need

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 01:20:52AM +, David Dunn wrote: > Eduardo, > > This is why it would be good to have a CPUID bit that says: > "apply SkyLake RSB stuffing." That's preferable to "trust FMS" > for VMware. Agreed it would be more useful than "trust FMS". However, I believe a "no need

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 02:12:02PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 01:37:05PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > >> For GCE, "you might be migrated to Skylake" is

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 02:12:02PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 01:37:05PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > >> For GCE, "you might be migrated to Skylake" is pretty much a > >>

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 05:10:11PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: [...] > The migration code could be 'tickled' (when arrived at the destination) > to recheck the CPUID and do the alternative logic to turn the > proper bits on. > > And this tickling could be as simple as an ACPI DSDT/AML

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 05:10:11PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: [...] > The migration code could be 'tickled' (when arrived at the destination) > to recheck the CPUID and do the alternative logic to turn the > proper bits on. > > And this tickling could be as simple as an ACPI DSDT/AML

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 02:49:51PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > And if we expect to introduce Cascade Lake into the pool in the > future, we use a Cascade Lake model number? > > It sounds like you are suggesting that we set the model number to the > highest model number that will ever be

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 02:49:51PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > And if we expect to introduce Cascade Lake into the pool in the > future, we use a Cascade Lake model number? > > It sounds like you are suggesting that we set the model number to the > highest model number that will ever be

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:29:28PM +, David Dunn wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 13:45:07 -0800, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > Maybe a generic "family/model/stepping/microcode really matches > > the CPU you are running on" bit would be useful. The bit could

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:29:28PM +, David Dunn wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 13:45:07 -0800, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > Maybe a generic "family/model/stepping/microcode really matches > > the CPU you are running on" bit would be useful. The bit could

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 01:37:05PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > For GCE, "you might be migrated to Skylake" is pretty much a > certainty. Even if you're in a zone that doesn't currently have > Skylake machines, chances are pretty good that it will have Skylake > machines some day in the

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 01:37:05PM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > For GCE, "you might be migrated to Skylake" is pretty much a > certainty. Even if you're in a zone that doesn't currently have > Skylake machines, chances are pretty good that it will have Skylake > machines some day in the

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 09:02:39PM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 12:44 -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On 1/29/2018 12:42 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > > > The question is how the hypervisor could tell that to the guest. >

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 09:02:39PM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 12:44 -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On 1/29/2018 12:42 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > > > The question is how the hypervisor could tell that to the guest. >

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 08:17:02PM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 18:14 -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > Sorry for being confused here, as probably the answer is buried > > on a LKML thread somewhere.  The comment explains what the code > &

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 08:17:02PM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 18:14 -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > Sorry for being confused here, as probably the answer is buried > > on a LKML thread somewhere.  The comment explains what the code > &

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:22:56PM +0100, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote: > From: David Woodhouse > > Not functional yet; just add the handling for it in the Spectre v2 > mitigation selection, and the X86_FEATURE_IBRS flag which will control > the code to be added in later patches. >

Re: [RFC,05/10] x86/speculation: Add basic IBRS support infrastructure

On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:22:56PM +0100, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote: > From: David Woodhouse > > Not functional yet; just add the handling for it in the Spectre v2 > mitigation selection, and the X86_FEATURE_IBRS flag which will control > the code to be added in later patches. > > Also take the

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 04:42:16PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:44:42PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 29/11/2017 12:44, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:32:09AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > >> On 13/1

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 04:42:16PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:44:42PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 29/11/2017 12:44, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:32:09AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > >> On 13/1

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 09:10:47PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:47:14PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 29/11/2017 19:42, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > The reproducer (not a full test case) is quite simple, see patch below. > > >

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 09:10:47PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:47:14PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 29/11/2017 19:42, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > The reproducer (not a full test case) is quite simple, see patch below. > > >

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:47:14PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 29/11/2017 19:42, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > The reproducer (not a full test case) is quite simple, see patch below. > > Great, thanks. I assume that the patch doesn't fix it?!? I was so convinced that it

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:47:14PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 29/11/2017 19:42, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > The reproducer (not a full test case) is quite simple, see patch below. > > Great, thanks. I assume that the patch doesn't fix it?!? I was so convinced that it

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:44:42PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 29/11/2017 12:44, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:32:09AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 13/11/2017 08:15, Wanpeng Li wrote: > >>> 2017-11-10 17:49 GMT+08:00 Paol

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:44:42PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 29/11/2017 12:44, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:32:09AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 13/11/2017 08:15, Wanpeng Li wrote: > >>> 2017-11-10 17:49 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini :

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:32:09AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 13/11/2017 08:15, Wanpeng Li wrote: > > 2017-11-10 17:49 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > >> Sometimes, a processor might execute an instruction while another > >> processor is updating the page tables for that

Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: inject exceptions produced by x86_decode_insn

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:32:09AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 13/11/2017 08:15, Wanpeng Li wrote: > > 2017-11-10 17:49 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini : > >> Sometimes, a processor might execute an instruction while another > >> processor is updating the page tables for that instruction's code page,

Re: [PATCH v8 7/7] KVM: x86: virtualize cpuid faulting

On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 10:57:27PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 04/11/2016 21:34, David Matlack wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Kyle Huey wrote: > >> + case MSR_PLATFORM_INFO: > >> + /* cpuid faulting is supported */ > >> +

Re: [PATCH v8 7/7] KVM: x86: virtualize cpuid faulting

On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 10:57:27PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 04/11/2016 21:34, David Matlack wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Kyle Huey wrote: > >> + case MSR_PLATFORM_INFO: > >> + /* cpuid faulting is supported */ > >> + msr_info->data =

Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: fix trashing of MSR_TSC_AUX

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 07:04:42PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:27:55PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > You mean KVM kernel patches? > > No, other ones. Here's one example: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467633035-32080-2-git-send-email-

Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: fix trashing of MSR_TSC_AUX

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 07:04:42PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:27:55PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > You mean KVM kernel patches? > > No, other ones. Here's one example: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467633035-32080-2-git-send-email-

Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: fix trashing of MSR_TSC_AUX

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:01:46PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:16:21PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Eduardo is the one to answer, but usually we add features to QEMU > > before the processors are released (typically as soon as KVM supports > > them). So with a

Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: fix trashing of MSR_TSC_AUX

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:01:46PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:16:21PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Eduardo is the one to answer, but usually we add features to QEMU > > before the processors are released (typically as soon as KVM supports > > them). So with a

  1   2   >