From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B350C4332F for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 15:17:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4NCk6j5MmHz3cMm for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 02:17:17 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=im3ECY8i; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=google.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::1034; helo=mail-pj1-x1034.google.com; envelope-from=seanjc@google.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=im3ECY8i; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pj1-x1034.google.com (mail-pj1-x1034.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1034]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4NCk5g0Dn2z3bqW for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 02:16:22 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1034.google.com with SMTP id u8-20020a17090a5e4800b002106dcdd4a0so5722823pji.1 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 07:16:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Geqy1MGLbG4CNNhTg6ig5gMw4IRIu2ApDkqg8kUu6fE=; b=im3ECY8irru0d2J3PmRkK1oS6XMYGDmkKrSKiLpQr6kggh65U519LacoANhp99/wDs yHeOZt/b6IK2ihlol7f0Ba2me3bs0cr3TxYhTcQThAifpYqs8dB3p/8NK2dEXBDay90O bW6pXrP7B14I1MNWa+NfggtZKbyTz1rnHhMsVYBCQiIPWqcakktYyuja6CoTLxQtkpfs JsqTKBMeEN72FgBWe/ihbCXP9h1x9TEb9ulziUgPn3ZIyNK23YQtGzg65j8/As9Xyk7K 3+HVs34s1miAiKC8ZfgoVMv73WwF3DJWJcQDYskZpYkejUuTFt6cPMAw/xSDBCQyvpM1 B6Kg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Geqy1MGLbG4CNNhTg6ig5gMw4IRIu2ApDkqg8kUu6fE=; b=Pd+6v6JiMZWOhrWy/b1av+5CSxaKFrru1rQNwDRnwVLX/Yy7ymE8frjxF3ZlDyfNVT DfG4cVSLB3Xc5C7gsqd+1gaj6S8uLB6h0r44/oFQlDvFn2zVZlhMD1oeeU8gbmZZHZWF DS7iYhrzqtrKg1Ppwv8en/XJLtM0BRU2wKdSPtUdrCQfQ0/PbsrQdwi7GIwJPfiPAwol 2FhpIsZxxlPdHZssxIAbqiZjm6mtT0lwxaXpjKeWboqWGZ15SZU5hiONpix/s/DX2R4V wTP/bXsaonevIdu+fb6BV8LRJUntdZqRh5YYCIjfXRT3x0bFS42LldQIr5lzXYKToU7l myPg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pnRcylNWQ0Ov8mUAcVe5vnyhlR7xyADZnaySX8+wRgpqD7fj3JQ wwMDGSyCctkFh/O8vC4HdLyu0w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf5Drbj5GGUy8zNXmPljMG8UuEFTPTHf+YuwVXyWlSocFeljs1OjIQ+Ab7mWXZMNXetmsxdGbQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:6b84:b0:20a:cbb0:3c9b with SMTP id w4-20020a17090a6b8400b0020acbb03c9bmr3280802pjj.81.1668698179289; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 07:16:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (7.104.168.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.168.104.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r12-20020a63e50c000000b00476dc914262sm1135777pgh.1.2022.11.17.07.16.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 17 Nov 2022 07:16:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 15:16:15 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: "Huang, Kai" Subject: Re: [PATCH 38/44] KVM: Disable CPU hotplug during hardware enabling Message-ID: References: <20221102231911.3107438-1-seanjc@google.com> <20221102231911.3107438-39-seanjc@google.com> <88e920944de70e7d69a98f74005b49c59b5aaa3b.camel@intel.com> <95ca433349eca601bdd2b16d70f59ba8e56d8e3f.camel@intel.com> <7fb66c497b6c41049167b05c63267cbc301b1c20.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7fb66c497b6c41049167b05c63267cbc301b1c20.camel@intel.com> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "mjrosato@linux.ibm.com" , "david@redhat.com" , "paul.walmsley@sifive.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" , "imbrenda@linux.ibm.com" , "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" , "linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "chenhuacai@kernel.org" , "aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com" , "james.morse@arm.com" , "borntraeger@linux.ibm.com" , "Gao, Chao" , "farman@linux.ibm.com" , "aou@eecs.berkeley.edu" , "suzuki.poulose@arm.com" , "Yao, Yuan" , "kvmarm@lists.linux.dev" , "tglx@linutro nix.de" , "alexandru.elisei@arm.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "frankja@linux.ibm.com" , "Yamahata, Isaku" , "atishp@atishpatra.org" , "farosas@linux.ibm.com" , "anup@brainfault.org" , "linux-mips@vger.kernel.org" , "oliver.upton@linux.dev" , "palmer@dabbelt.com" , "kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org" , "maz@kernel.org" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "vkuznets@redhat.com" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, Huang, Kai wrote: > On Wed, 2022-11-16 at 17:11 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > static int kvm_x86_check_processor_compatibility(void) > > { > > int cpu = smp_processor_id(); > > struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(cpu); > > > > /* > > * Compatibility checks are done when loading KVM and when enabling > > * hardware, e.g. during CPU hotplug, to ensure all online CPUs are > > * compatible, i.e. KVM should never perform a compatibility check on > > * an offline CPU. > > */ > > WARN_ON(!cpu_online(cpu)); > > Looks good to me. Perhaps this also can be removed, though. Hmm, it's a bit superfluous, but I think it could fire if KVM messed up CPU hotplug again, e.g. if the for_each_online_cpu() => IPI raced with CPU unplug. > And IMHO the removing of WARN_ON(!irq_disabled()) should be folded to the patch > "[PATCH 37/44] KVM: Rename and move CPUHP_AP_KVM_STARTING to ONLINE section". > Because moving from STARTING section to ONLINE section changes the IRQ status > when the compatibility check is called. Yep, that's what I have coded up, just smushed it all together here.