From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@sigma-star.at>
Subject: Re: Revert "x86/speculation: Simplify indirect_branch_prediction_barrier()" crashes KVM guest
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 00:45:29 +0100
Message-ID: <3378738.8dlq1zuRqp@blindfold>
References: <1753460.Vme2X1QhPT@blindfold> <1518737310.7876.10.camel@infradead.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, luto@kernel.org, arjan@linux.intel.com,
        bp@alien8.de, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        jpoimboe@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
        arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com, dave.hansen@intel.com,
        jmattson@google.com, karahmed@amazon.de, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com, sironi@amazon.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from lilium.sigma-star.at ([109.75.188.150]:37848 "EHLO
        lilium.sigma-star.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1164340AbeBOXoP (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 15 Feb 2018 18:44:15 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1518737310.7876.10.camel@infradead.org>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Am Freitag, 16. Februar 2018, 00:28:30 CET schrieb David Woodhouse:
> On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 00:12 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > [    2.791518] Code: 8b 45 00 49 8b 7d 08 49 83 c5 18 31 d2 31 f6 ff
> > d0 49 8b 45 00 48 85 c0 75 e9 eb b1 b9 49 00 00 00 b8 01 00 00 00 ba
> > 00 00 00 00 <0f> 30 e9 68 fd ff ff 9c 58 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 89 c5 fa
> > 66 0f 1f
> 
>   23:   b9 49 00 00 00          mov    $0x49,%ecx
>   28:   b8 01 00 00 00          mov    $0x1,%eax
>   2d:   ba 00 00 00 00          mov    $0x0,%edx
>   32:   0f 30                   wrmsr  
> 
> The faulting instruction is the wrmsr itself. That shouldn't happen; if
> the CPUID bit indicates that the MSR exists, then it should exist.
> 
> The reverted patch did use the C __wrmsr() macro which contained a
> fixup for this GP# but it was just a side-effect of the "cleanup" — it
> wasn't intentional because that really shouldn't happen. That looks
> like a qemu bug as first glance.

Hmmm, yes seems so. Just gave latest qemu a try, works fine. ;-\

Thanks,
//richard

-- 
sigma star gmbh - Eduard-Bodem-Gasse 6 - 6020 Innsbruck - Austria
ATU66964118 - FN 374287y