From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3] x86/paravirt: Fix baremetal paravirt MSR ops Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:32:53 +0100 Message-ID: <55FADD25.6040909@citrix.com> References: <20150917071920.GA14296@gmail.com> <20150917093134.GC12316@nazgul.tnic> <55FAA66E.1070401@redhat.com> <20150917152709.GB17766@nazgul.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Peter Zijlstra , KVM list , Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , , , Andrew Morton , xen-devel , Andy Lutomirski , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , "Arjan van de Ven" , Ingo Molnar To: Borislav Petkov , Paolo Bonzini Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150917152709.GB17766@nazgul.tnic> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 17/09/15 16:27, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 01:39:26PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> That's not a big deal, that's what *_safe is for. The problem is that >> there are definitely some cases where the *_safe version is not being used. > I mean to do feature checks which assure you that those MSRs are > there so you don't need the safe variants. And that is not always > easy/possible. > There are plenty of non-architectural MSRs in use which don't have feature bits. Xen used to have problems booting when using the masking MSRs when booting virtualised. Nowadays it uses a cpu vendor check and _safe() probe to detect support. ~Andrew