From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A0051D1E6A for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2024 13:38:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728308301; cv=none; b=aXFF0jtlUd0aNrRA36nDqwpE7QXqgvaB3KId+JaBJ2+ERZKtRZbbM5kYKfc3atfmWuwWJnCVjeDPWTXkzMZj4U/yK0yWcMmc88cmMjemxVPPiiy2zayta3aQvEtQN2GTL3ZbNHM1ilzMpxJdkrw53/94Xj6YbYk/+PqrrMUTLt4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728308301; c=relaxed/simple; bh=yVdeGgNTfeFuIEVPc7u0AK0zINUin07XGVxlqUetaSQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=t1X8BZ8uVCQ99Vn56cSIpcSznhZUkhBRQAttdKvkjaKvt729ggVSjip0xqELDrGsRtKExA+6DN/2d9tfzhnwsl05RFR4DRLO2hvYKHeu3C3wFchTfxkVQuDCIpB6an7RigIZeClvFGVMCk+1JASdIoz+JXXSZeKF3PL4zhUKQso= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=hdK03pHB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="hdK03pHB" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1728308299; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Y5DPNZskkiUAq4LS5OFpU8MIweVBZO51RYIR24GV8o8=; b=hdK03pHBgUv71YXK4AYHt02n1CH+DiY9M9HdpLFOzKlb+wZvnhhg6++u3cj9KC85sjAX3+ UfzDri+Vpc/zwnTB8fIVDicEhYBshtXViFgYqOoiSIXcLVunIOvbUDqHnnQKjzJQReyhj9 TIteoPvxBl0F9wJYNFMT3CecSaiQ9GY= Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-620-KUmj3Ik_O-OV2d48rwKZRg-1; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 09:38:18 -0400 X-MC-Unique: KUmj3Ik_O-OV2d48rwKZRg-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-37d0506098cso2757911f8f.1 for ; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 06:38:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728308297; x=1728913097; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Y5DPNZskkiUAq4LS5OFpU8MIweVBZO51RYIR24GV8o8=; b=v5MukWLhwZClPJMSj8CmzU/1oGwoW0gqsctRK/h/fZRmJGlWQqwiDq44goS62YEK9S 8O8o0Pb/5u749baAHWi3j2HjWtY6WsJM7JVv3VkoGERjxAH/oEjKzzWMVD61+eskbSF6 I9MXL7VC3AY5lyz1sYYaSrKJwI1GljV6HKTN78bSumvtsLHDogNb4y1QSosqaLGjs74V 8dXitNhiBVPLX7h3Z51SlUg003VBztxtUHcA0AKAC8RqgKpv2J4litdP+it6DHYyZAMK onoh2ilaLq+VRusGBI35/yZZMZNudI25STg3KSI+Dy1IxPRJjQXuheijGYQPCWiUUml5 T5mw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy21UTZC0n/tip0InViSYJQ0VieMRvBC13YuZeq76pElHNrUCT5 TDjyd4l3J7s8f2vq/DUNg56KoFJK4DjDo7PrCPhVZzc+HGDi67yY75czKS0lL940xCWCbMtihZF c5a0sqVKhjPctJzGJgbrlhrelqpEnrvm6ftS4pWL5xswTg0A8Dg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:ea8c:0:b0:374:c287:929b with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-37d0e6bb291mr6937302f8f.4.1728308296957; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 06:38:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE0TwOIoXGhtncVqqSCdfhnggtMr8A9YmeYV2RL1PX3MgPcnG86Oq8dGEM8Qg3X1MoztO3Yqw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:ea8c:0:b0:374:c287:929b with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-37d0e6bb291mr6937277f8f.4.1728308296459; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 06:38:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fedora (g2.ign.cz. [91.219.240.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-37d1690f75bsm5766858f8f.23.2024.10.07.06.38.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 07 Oct 2024 06:38:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Vitaly Kuznetsov To: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" , Sean Christopherson , Paolo Bonzini Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kevin Tian , Yan Zhao , Yiwei Zhang , Lai Jiangshan , "Paul E. McKenney" , Josh Triplett , Gerd Hoffmann , Linux kernel regressions list Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] KVM: VMX: Always honor guest PAT on CPUs that support self-snoop In-Reply-To: References: <20240309010929.1403984-1-seanjc@google.com> <20240309010929.1403984-6-seanjc@google.com> <877cbyuzdn.fsf@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2024 15:38:15 +0200 Message-ID: <87iku4ghiw.fsf@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" writes: > On 30.08.24 11:35, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >> Sean Christopherson writes: >> >>> Unconditionally honor guest PAT on CPUs that support self-snoop, as >>> Intel has confirmed that CPUs that support self-snoop always snoop caches >>> and store buffers. I.e. CPUs with self-snoop maintain cache coherency >>> even in the presence of aliased memtypes, thus there is no need to trust >>> the guest behaves and only honor PAT as a last resort, as KVM does today. >>> >>> Honoring guest PAT is desirable for use cases where the guest has access >>> to non-coherent DMA _without_ bouncing through VFIO, e.g. when a virtual >>> (mediated, for all intents and purposes) GPU is exposed to the guest, along >>> with buffers that are consumed directly by the physical GPU, i.e. which >>> can't be proxied by the host to ensure writes from the guest are performed >>> with the correct memory type for the GPU. >> >> Necroposting! >> >> Turns out that this change broke "bochs-display" driver in QEMU even >> when the guest is modern (don't ask me 'who the hell uses bochs for >> modern guests', it was basically a configuration error :-). E.g: >> [...] > > This regression made it to the list of tracked regressions. It seems > this thread stalled a while ago. Was this ever fixed? Does not look like > it, but I might have missed something. Or is this a regression I should > just ignore for one reason or another? > The regression was addressed in by reverting 377b2f359d1f in 6.11 commit 9d70f3fec14421e793ffbc0ec2f739b24e534900 Author: Paolo Bonzini Date: Sun Sep 15 02:49:33 2024 -0400 Revert "KVM: VMX: Always honor guest PAT on CPUs that support self-snoop" Also, there's a (pending) DRM patch fixing it from the guest's side: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/misc/kernel/-/commit/9388ccf69925223223c87355a417ba39b13a5e8e -- Vitaly