From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Shivansh Dhiman <shivansh.dhiman@amd.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, yosry@kernel.org,
jmattson@google.com, thomas.lendacky@amd.com,
nikunj.dadhania@amd.com, ravi.bangoria@amd.com,
santosh.shukla@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] KVM: SVM: Refactor svm_update_lbrv()
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 10:31:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <arav9aN48nEZTv7V@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260721050600.87268-2-shivansh.dhiman@amd.com>
The shortlog is effectively "do work". Be more precise.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2026, Shivansh Dhiman wrote:
> Rewrite the enable_lbrv computation in svm_update_lbrv() as a series of
> 'if' statements. Rename nested_vmcb12_has_lbrv() to nested_lbrv_enabled(),
> expose it, and use it instead of open-coding the nested LBRV check.
This is super duper obviously two separate and *barely* related patches.
> No functional change intended.
>
> Suggested-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosry@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Shivansh Dhiman <shivansh.dhiman@amd.com>
> Reviewed-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosry@kernel.org>
> ---
> Changelog:
> v3 -> v4:
> * Rename nested_vmcb12_has_lbrv() to nested_lbrv_enabled() (Yosry).
I don't like this change. Unlike nested_vgif_enabled(), this is *only* checking
the effective vmcb12. Once the guest_cpu_cap_has() code is moved elsewhere, I
don't see any point in keeping the helper.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> index ef69a51ab27f..e9f2456982d4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> @@ -880,9 +880,13 @@ void svm_update_lbrv(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
> bool current_enable_lbrv = svm->vmcb->control.misc_ctl2 & SVM_MISC2_ENABLE_V_LBR;
> - bool enable_lbrv = (svm->vmcb->save.dbgctl & DEBUGCTLMSR_LBR) ||
> - (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && guest_cpu_cap_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_LBRV) &&
> - (svm->nested.ctl.misc_ctl2 & SVM_MISC2_ENABLE_V_LBR));
> + bool enable_lbrv = false;
> +
> + if (svm->vmcb->save.dbgctl & DEBUGCTLMSR_LBR)
> + enable_lbrv = true;
> +
> + if (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && nested_lbrv_enabled(vcpu))
> + enable_lbrv = true;
This is begging for short-circuit logic (which was kinda the point of the existing
code). An if-elif is silly, and I agree that squeezing everything into variable
initialization is hard to read, so I think we should do:
static bool svm_need_lbr_virtualization(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
if (svm->vmcb->save.dbgctl & (DEBUGCTLMSR_LBR | DEBUGCTLMSR_BUS_LOCK_DETECT))
return true;
return is_guest_mode(vcpu) &&
(svm->nested.ctl.misc_ctl2 & SVM_MISC2_ENABLE_V_LBR);
}
bool enable_lbrv = svm_need_lbr_virtualization(vcpu);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-25 17:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-21 5:05 [PATCH v4 0/5] KVM: SVM: Add Bus Lock Detect support and refactor LBRV Shivansh Dhiman
2026-07-21 5:05 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] KVM: SVM: Refactor svm_update_lbrv() Shivansh Dhiman
2026-07-21 6:40 ` Nikunj A. Dadhania
2026-07-21 9:16 ` Shivansh Dhiman
2026-09-25 17:31 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2026-09-30 22:16 ` Shivansh Dhiman
2026-07-21 5:05 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] KVM: nSVM: Disable LBRV in nested control cache when unsupported Shivansh Dhiman
2026-07-21 5:05 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] KVM: nSVM: Sanitize nested DR6 using kvm_dr6_fixed() Shivansh Dhiman
2026-07-21 5:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-25 17:26 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-09-25 17:39 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-09-30 22:16 ` Shivansh Dhiman
2026-07-21 5:05 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] KVM: SVM: Turn DEBUGCTL_RESERVED_BITS into a helper Shivansh Dhiman
2026-09-25 17:43 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-09-30 22:29 ` Shivansh Dhiman
2026-07-21 5:06 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] KVM: SVM: Add Bus Lock Detect support Shivansh Dhiman
2026-09-25 17:45 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] KVM: SVM: Add Bus Lock Detect support and refactor LBRV Sean Christopherson
2026-09-25 23:01 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-09-28 18:38 ` Shivansh Dhiman
2026-10-01 20:18 ` Shivansh Dhiman
2026-10-01 23:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-09-30 23:05 ` Shivansh Dhiman
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=arav9aN48nEZTv7V@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nikunj.dadhania@amd.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=ravi.bangoria@amd.com \
--cc=santosh.shukla@amd.com \
--cc=shivansh.dhiman@amd.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yosry@kernel.org \
/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