From: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
"Gabriel L. Somlo" <gsomlo@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: x86: drop bogus MWAIT check
Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 16:33:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170504143328.GB26642@potion> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <638dd02c-102a-21d8-7a10-30a3ef3c357d@redhat.com>
2017-05-04 12:58+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 03/05/2017 21:37, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> The guest can call MWAIT with ECX = 0 even if we enforce
>> CPUID5_ECX_INTERRUPT_BREAK; the call would have the exactly the same
>> effect as if the host didn't have CPUID5_ECX_INTERRUPT_BREAK.
>>
>> The check was added in some iteration while trying to fix a reported
>> OS X on Core 2 bug, but the CPU had CPUID5_ECX_INTERRUPT_BREAK and the
>> bug is elsewhere.
>
> The reason for this, as I understood it, is that we have historically
> not published leaf 5 information via KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID. For this
> reason, QEMU is publishing CPUID5_ECX_INTERRUPT_BREAK. Then if:
I see, it was added to QEMU in e737b32a3688 ("Core 2 Duo specification
(Alexander Graf)").
> - the host doesn't have ECX[0]=1 support
>
> - the guest sets ECX[0]
>
> you get a #GP in the guest. So wrong comment but right thing to do.
That userspace didn't set CPUID.01H:ECX.MONITOR[bit 3], so a guest
should get #UD instead, but MWAIT couldn't be expected to work.
I think that the guest bug is very unlikely, so I'd get rid of the
condition anyway ... we have also recently killed support for pre-Core 2
hosts and AFAIK, all newer Intels have it.
(Not so sure about AMDs, which share the same problem, so we do need to
do more than just comment it better in any case.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-04 14:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-03 19:37 [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes Radim Krčmář
2017-05-03 19:37 ` [PATCH 1/4] KVM: svm: prevent MWAIT in guest with erratum 400 Radim Krčmář
2017-05-03 20:11 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-05-04 14:02 ` Radim Krčmář
2017-05-04 16:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-05-03 19:37 ` [PATCH 2/4] KVM: x86: prevent MWAIT in guest with buggy MONITOR Radim Krčmář
2017-05-03 19:37 ` [PATCH 3/4] KVM: x86: drop bogus MWAIT check Radim Krčmář
2017-05-04 10:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-05-04 14:33 ` Radim Krčmář [this message]
2017-05-04 18:29 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-05-04 20:03 ` Radim Krčmář
2017-05-04 18:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-05-03 19:37 ` [PATCH 4/4] KVM: x86: simplify kvm_mwait_in_guest() Radim Krčmář
2017-05-03 19:45 ` [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes Alexander Graf
2017-05-04 17:56 ` Gabriel L. Somlo
2017-05-04 18:07 ` Radim Krčmář
2017-05-05 13:02 ` Gabriel L. Somlo
2017-05-06 16:48 ` Gabriel L. Somlo
2017-05-08 7:23 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=20170504143328.GB26642@potion \
--to=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=gsomlo@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox