From: Robert Hoo <robert.hu@linux.intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, vkuznets@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com,
jmattson@google.com, joro@8bytes.org, chang.seok.bae@intel.com,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, robert.hu@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] x86/cpufeature: Add CPUID.19H:{EBX,ECX} cpuid leaves
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 11:34:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <69c69e29813f32d534b34c84d91f366df58eefe0.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YGstqj6YH96jrlAl@google.com>
On Mon, 2021-04-05 at 15:32 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > index 8f2f050..d4a883a 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
> > /*
> > * Defines x86 CPU feature bits
> > */
> > -#define NCAPINTS 19 /* N 32-bit words worth
> > of info */
> > +#define NCAPINTS 21 /* N 32-bit words worth
> > of info */
> > #define NBUGINTS 1 /* N 32-bit bug flags */
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -382,6 +382,15 @@
> > #define X86_FEATURE_CORE_CAPABILITIES (18*32+30) /* ""
> > IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES MSR */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_SPEC_CTRL_SSBD (18*32+31) /* "" Speculative
> > Store Bypass Disable */
> >
> > +/* Intel-defined KeyLocker feature CPUID level 0x00000019 (EBX),
> > word 20*/
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_KL_INS_ENABLED (19*32 + 0) /* "" Key Locker
> > instructions */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_KL_WIDE (19*32 + 2) /* "" Wide Key Locker
> > instructions */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_IWKEY_BACKUP (19*32 + 4) /* "" IWKey backup
> > */
> > +
> > +/* Intel-defined KeyLocker feature CPUID level 0x00000019 (ECX),
> > word 21*/
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_IWKEY_NOBACKUP (20*32 + 0) /* "" NoBackup
> > parameter to LOADIWKEY */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_IWKEY_RAND (20*32 + 1) /* IWKey Randomization
> > */
>
> These should probably go into a Linux-defined leaf, I'm guessing
> neither leaf
> will be anywhere near full, at least in Linux. KVM's reverse-CPUID
> code will
> likely/hopefully be gaining support for scattered leafs in the near
> future[*],
> that side of things should be a non-issue if/when this lands.
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/02455fc7521e9f1dc621b57c02c52cd04ce07797.1616136308.git.kai.huang@intel.com
Yes, in my internal private tree, I have refactored code based on your
patch.
BTW, I'm thinking, what if when those new HW-defined leaves got more
occupied? will then they be moved from the Linux-defined leaves to new
truely-map-to-HW-definition leaves?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-06 3:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-25 9:06 [RFC PATCH 00/12] KVM: Support Intel KeyLocker Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] x86/keylocker: Move LOADIWKEY opcode definition from keylocker.c to keylocker.h Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] x86/cpufeature: Add CPUID.19H:{EBX,ECX} cpuid leaves Robert Hoo
2021-04-05 15:32 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-06 3:34 ` Robert Hoo [this message]
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] kvm/vmx: Introduce the new tertiary processor-based VM-execution controls Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:41 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-01-26 9:27 ` Robert Hoo
2021-02-03 6:32 ` Robert Hoo
2021-02-03 8:45 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2021-04-05 15:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-06 3:37 ` Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] kvm/vmx: enable LOADIWKEY vm-exit support in " Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] kvm/vmx: Add KVM support on KeyLocker operations Robert Hoo
2021-04-05 16:25 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-08 5:44 ` Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 06/12] kvm/cpuid: Enumerate KeyLocker feature in KVM Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] kvm/vmx/nested: Support new IA32_VMX_PROCBASED_CTLS3 vmx feature control MSR Robert Hoo
2021-04-05 15:44 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-08 5:45 ` Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 08/12] kvm/vmx: Refactor vmx_compute_tertiary_exec_control() Robert Hoo
2021-04-05 15:46 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-04-08 5:45 ` Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 09/12] kvm/vmx/vmcs12: Add Tertiary Exec-Control field in vmcs12 Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] kvm/vmx/nested: Support tertiary VM-Exec control in vmcs02 Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] kvm/vmx/nested: Support CR4.KL in nested Robert Hoo
2021-01-25 9:06 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] kvm/vmx/nested: Enable nested LOADIWKey VM-exit Robert Hoo
2021-04-05 16:03 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] KVM: Support Intel KeyLocker Sean Christopherson
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=69c69e29813f32d534b34c84d91f366df58eefe0.camel@linux.intel.com \
--to=robert.hu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=robert.hu@intel.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.