From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/kvm: Convert some slow-path static_cpu_has() callers to boot_cpu_has() Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 09:33:52 +0200 Message-ID: <20190401073352.GB28264@zn.tnic> References: <20190330112022.28888-1-bp@alien8.de> <20190330112022.28888-4-bp@alien8.de> <2f71cb35-46b2-9ed5-28b3-c6eb5e647b46@redhat.com> <20190331151248.GB15073@zn.tnic> <86dc0d5c-88af-dddc-4618-1a0a5a545e5f@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: LKML , Nadav Amit , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Joerg Roedel , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Thomas Gleixner , x86@kernel.org To: Paolo Bonzini Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86dc0d5c-88af-dddc-4618-1a0a5a545e5f@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 09:24:06AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > The MSR reads and writes are not done in the common case. Also, you > cannot really expect boot_cpu_data to be in L1 in these functions since > they run after the guest---or if they do, each L1 line you fill in with > host data is one line you "steal" from the guest. Ok, fair enough. I'll drop this patch. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.