From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kvm: x86: emulate monitor and mwait instructions as
 nop
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 22:37:39 +0300
Message-ID: <20140604193738.GA744@redhat.com>
References: <20140507205210.GA30030@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU>
 <20140602192530.GC1653@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU>
 <538D92BC.4060203@redhat.com>
 <20140604143941.GF1653@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU>
 <538F30BD.5000501@suse.de>
 <20140604150519.GG1653@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU>
 <538F36BD.9040404@suse.de>
 <20140604170720.GH1653@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU>
 <20140604190618.GF11756@redhat.com>
 <20140604192405.GI1653@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: "Gabriel L. Somlo" <gsomlo@gmail.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1150 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751293AbaFDThN (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 4 Jun 2014 15:37:13 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140604192405.GI1653@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 03:24:06PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:06:18PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 01:07:21PM -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
> > > Ah, so kvm_vcpu_ioctl_set_cpuid() and friends, morally similar to
> > > kvm_vcpu_ioctl_enable_cap() on ppc, except it turns on cpuid flags
> > > instead of entire kvm capabilities.
> > > 
> > > So we either have
> > > 
> > > 	1 always-on but masked-by-default monitor/mwait as
> > > 	  nop, and enable just the cpuid flag on demand via the
> > > 	  existing ioctl_enable_cap() mechanism (and I have to
> > > 	  check out the qemu parser for cpuid command-line flags),
> > > 
> > > or
> > > 
> > > 	2 off-by-default monitor/mwait/cpuid-flag, enabled via
> > > 	  ioctl_enable_cap(), which would have to first be ported
> > > 	  to x86, and would require somewhat more extensive qemu
> > > 	  hackery to take advantage of.
> > > 
> > > I think I sense a "path of least resistance" here, even though IMHO
> > > #2 is still "The Right Thing To Do (TM)"  :) :)
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > --Gabriel
> > 
> > I think it's worng.
> > We really can't emulate mwait at the moment.
> > All we manage to do is a work-around for broken guests.
> > 
> > So let's not pretend that we can, just enable nop
> > unconditionally and be done with it.
> > Paolo already said it's OK with him, and I'll ack too.
> > 
> > Otherwise you are giving bad information to well-behaved guests,
> > so e.g. linux will try to use mwait. You don't want this.
> 
> That's why I suggested having it default to disabled, and only
> allowing it to be turned on per VM, explicitly.

Turn on the bit in CPUID? Why is it useful?
I thought the point of the nop hack is work around
for broken guests.

> > The advantage is that if at some point CPUs can
> > actually support mwait in VMs, at that point
> > we will enable the CPUID bit, and userspace and guests
> > will be able to detect that and rely on that bit
> > to mean "mwait works and is efficient".
> 
> OK, that makes sense. Thanks for helping me finally get over it ;)
> 
> --Gabriel