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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E652C433F5 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 14:51:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244076AbiC1OxR (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:53:17 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35436 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S244110AbiC1OxH (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:53:07 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x535.google.com (mail-pg1-x535.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::535]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F84E4BB97 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 07:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x535.google.com with SMTP id l129so3916103pga.3 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 07:51:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=obleDDk1Z4CONGxAkHZNS2tjDM/nuYlv6cPwOVJDufY=; b=h8Ok29DH4z6N0TfkIQj67vjU5KD03U8eMxwkX7kHs1WHIbA4lLyhTbcKvx33kZrWV5 4tWfsq4cMxVflItMlDGuqv7OJV1eH4KdzObOzdOtizGAIkxs5mrn85cRduSTqrnG00PQ lL3IUJdXqE+IrbTYrjk1tVVXals52dlLJhfHN08n6eJ+rnGqFHEtsew3k8F56JnePW/4 Zw7A6sVXJ+Aq9Tjx6/ONd0HiSUFF1MWVPcy4GVHXqAPwBhLU2ccTWenC/NJysEW/Rd95 T3atXP4WAJ0g/Hnd6AHuxCGN4fX4Zp/B2DOVWsUW09lZPzOuSOBmfGQUZqJmRMe9+EP3 BWiA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=obleDDk1Z4CONGxAkHZNS2tjDM/nuYlv6cPwOVJDufY=; b=0REcFbyK+0NyiaOwbM62KJZbcaza6WQRXtcRpZ/vmUJUojLrm+yJT4u7evmZzWbf3v CFGkCUyZNTBg0kHTPMwf0dHJl0MVkzZWbZFcKHTg6egvu0Bf8rH9sSTot4DmcHINng+a wLk7hhwFy19xfuRcNsA0LGEd/AzM8YjLdMvkxIvN0RBo4dWaBjxBLDTw+QAZgzfjEkEW nir7UDnXCuB1lumQVLTwEuNnXTPnTr/1+J8uWFdFZO8/U7TcDK0eQ37SN34elj6ZjntO Z8zw5qtL/LPCa7W3imxQ/9S8OjqEuqEqpTD2Uo9ltJ+3qmnf1yv5CiGXcjhGNR48Ia5i kO/w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530hadDVKhqmar70h1nhPqywQt+0pXwB8KYFIUZARMVe1g9m55OL 73bGl+l9wd5aceItGlxm2m0PKA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx6O3QG54jbtM3+68GYNfgyadHMEYPzXTEypnpZ1C+mZMHehDR1WLLZmYv16OhknEgRZIk0wg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:68c6:0:b0:380:3fbc:dfb6 with SMTP id d189-20020a6368c6000000b003803fbcdfb6mr10592508pgc.326.1648479085523; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 07:51:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (157.214.185.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.185.214.157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h12-20020a056a00230c00b004faf2563bcasm15408065pfh.114.2022.03.28.07.51.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 07:51:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 14:51:21 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Jon Kohler Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , "x86@kernel.org" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: optimize PKU branching in kvm_load_{guest|host}_xsave_state Message-ID: References: <20220324004439.6709-1-jon@nutanix.com> <387E8E8B-81B9-40FF-8D52-76821599B7E4@nutanix.com> <1E31F2B6-96BF-42E0-AD41-3C512D98D74B@nutanix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1E31F2B6-96BF-42E0-AD41-3C512D98D74B@nutanix.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 28, 2022, Jon Kohler wrote: > > > > On Mar 27, 2022, at 6:43 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > On 3/26/22 02:37, Jon Kohler wrote: > >>>> Flip the ordering of the || condition so that XFEATURE_MASK_PKRU is > >>>> checked first, which when instrumented in our environment appeared > >>>> to be always true and less overall work than kvm_read_cr4_bits. > >>> > >>> If it's always true, then it should be checked last, not first. And if > >> Sean thanks for the review. This would be a left handed || short circuit, so > >> wouldn’t we want always true to be first? > > > > Yes. > > Ack, thanks. Yeah, I lost track of whether it was a || or &&.