From: Manali Shukla <manali.shukla@amd.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, shuah@kernel.org, nikunj@amd.com,
thomas.lendacky@amd.com, vkuznets@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
babu.moger@amd.com, Manali Shukla <manali.shukla@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] x86/cpufeatures: Add CPUID feature bit for the Bus Lock Threshold
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 15:13:08 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <11485f4f-1d26-4320-9d2a-2032a8e19653@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zr-qkJirOC_GM9o6@google.com>
Hi Sean,
Thank you for reviewing my patches.
On 8/17/2024 1:07 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2024, Manali Shukla wrote:
>> Malicious guests can cause bus locks to degrade the performance of
>
> I would say "misbehaving", I bet the overwhelming majority of bus locks in practice
> are due to legacy/crusty software, not malicious software.
>
Ack.
>> a system. Non-WB(write-back) and misaligned locked
>> RMW(read-modify-write) instructions are referred to as "bus locks" and
>> require system wide synchronization among all processors to guarantee
>> atomicity. The bus locks may incur significant performance penalties
>> for all processors in the system.
>>
>> The Bus Lock Threshold feature proves beneficial for hypervisors
>> seeking to restrict guests' ability to initiate numerous bus locks,
>> thereby preventing system slowdowns that affect all tenants.
>
> None of this actually says what the feature does.
>
Sure I will rewrite the commit message.
>> Presence of the Bus Lock threshold feature is indicated via CPUID
>> function 0x8000000A_EDX[29]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Manali Shukla <manali.shukla@amd.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>> index 3c7434329661..10f397873790 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>> @@ -381,6 +381,7 @@
>> #define X86_FEATURE_V_SPEC_CTRL (15*32+20) /* Virtual SPEC_CTRL */
>> #define X86_FEATURE_VNMI (15*32+25) /* Virtual NMI */
>> #define X86_FEATURE_SVME_ADDR_CHK (15*32+28) /* "" SVME addr check */
>> +#define X86_FEATURE_BUS_LOCK_THRESHOLD (15*32+29) /* "" Bus lock threshold */
>
> I would strongly prefer to enumerate this in /proc/cpuinfo, having to manually
> query CPUID to see if a CPU supports a feature I want to test is beyond annoying.
I will do the modifications accordingly.
>
>> /* Intel-defined CPU features, CPUID level 0x00000007:0 (ECX), word 16 */
>> #define X86_FEATURE_AVX512VBMI (16*32+ 1) /* AVX512 Vector Bit Manipulation instructions*/
>>
>> base-commit: 704ec48fc2fbd4e41ec982662ad5bf1eee33eeb2
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>>
- Manali
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-22 9:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-09 17:51 [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] Add support for the Bus Lock Threshold Manali Shukla
2024-07-09 17:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] x86/cpufeatures: Add CPUID feature bit " Manali Shukla
2024-08-16 19:37 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-22 9:43 ` Manali Shukla [this message]
2024-08-29 6:48 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-08-30 4:42 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-30 8:21 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-09-20 5:53 ` Manali Shukla
2024-07-09 17:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/4] KVM: SVM: Enable Bus lock threshold exit Manali Shukla
2024-08-16 19:54 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-24 5:35 ` Manali Shukla
2024-08-26 16:15 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-29 6:37 ` Manali Shukla
2024-08-28 16:44 ` Manali Shukla
2024-07-09 17:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 3/4] KVM: x86: nSVM: Implement support for nested Bus Lock Threshold Manali Shukla
2024-08-16 20:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-28 15:52 ` Manali Shukla
2024-08-16 20:14 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-29 14:32 ` Manali Shukla
2024-07-09 17:51 ` [RFC PATCH v1 4/4] KVM: selftests: Add bus lock exit test Manali Shukla
2024-08-16 20:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-26 10:29 ` Manali Shukla
2024-08-26 16:06 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-08-29 9:41 ` Manali Shukla
2024-07-30 4:52 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] Add support for the Bus Lock Threshold Manali Shukla
2024-08-07 3:55 ` Manali Shukla
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=11485f4f-1d26-4320-9d2a-2032a8e19653@amd.com \
--to=manali.shukla@amd.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nikunj@amd.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=vkuznets@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