public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
To: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@intel.com>, "Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@intel.com>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"brgerst@gmail.com" <brgerst@gmail.com>,
	"andrew.cooper3@citrix.com" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"rafael@kernel.org" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"seanjc@google.com" <seanjc@google.com>,
	"xin@zytor.com" <xin@zytor.com>,
	"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kprateek.nayak@amd.com" <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
	"pavel@kernel.org" <pavel@kernel.org>,
	"david.kaplan@amd.com" <david.kaplan@amd.com>,
	"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/5] x86/boot: Shift VMXON from KVM init to CPU startup phase
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 06:13:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c29abf85-aafe-4cf8-b4e8-6d3b5b250ce6@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16a9cc439f2826ee99ff1cfc42c9006a7a544dd4.camel@intel.com>

> 
> Since I think doing VMXON when bringing up CPU unconditionally is a
> dramatic move at this stage, I was actually thinking we don't do VMXON in
> CPUHP callback, but only do prepare things like sanity check and VMXON
> region setup etc.  If anything fails, we refuse to online CPU, or mark CPU
> as VMX not supported, whatever.

the whole point is to always vmxon -- and simplify all the complexity
from doing this dynamic.
So yes "dramatic" maybe but needed -- especially as things like TDX
and TDX connect need vmxon to be enabled outside of KVM context.


> 
> The core kernel then provides two APIs to do VMXON/VMXOFF respectively,
> and KVM can use them.  The APIs needs to handle concurrent requests from
> multiple users, though.  VMCLEAR could still be in KVM since this is kinda
> KVM's internal on how to manage vCPUs.
> 
> Does this make sense?

not to me -- the whole point is to not having this dynamic thing


  reply	other threads:[~2025-09-10 13:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-09 18:28 [RFC PATCH v1 0/5] x86/boot, KVM: Move VMXON/VMXOFF handling from KVM to CPU lifecycle Xin Li (Intel)
2025-09-09 18:28 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/5] x86/boot: Shift VMXON from KVM init to CPU startup phase Xin Li (Intel)
2025-09-10  5:37   ` Adrian Hunter
2025-09-10  7:25   ` Chao Gao
2025-09-11  6:57     ` Xin Li
2025-09-10  8:02   ` Huang, Kai
2025-09-10 11:10     ` Chao Gao
2025-09-10 11:35       ` Huang, Kai
2025-09-10 13:13         ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2025-09-10 20:52           ` Huang, Kai
2025-09-09 18:28 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/5] x86/boot: Move VMXOFF from KVM teardown to CPU shutdown phase Xin Li (Intel)
2025-09-09 18:28 ` [RFC PATCH v1 3/5] x86/shutdown, KVM: VMX: Move VMCLEAR of VMCSs to cpu_disable_virtualization() Xin Li (Intel)
2025-09-09 18:28 ` [RFC PATCH v1 4/5] x86/reboot: Remove emergency_reboot_disable_virtualization() Xin Li (Intel)
2025-09-09 18:28 ` [RFC PATCH v1 5/5] KVM: Remove kvm_rebooting and its references Xin Li (Intel)
2025-09-16 17:56   ` Sean Christopherson
2025-09-17 16:51     ` Xin Li
2025-09-17 23:02       ` Sean Christopherson
2025-09-11 14:20 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/5] x86/boot, KVM: Move VMXON/VMXOFF handling from KVM to CPU lifecycle Sean Christopherson
2025-09-11 15:20   ` Dave Hansen
2025-09-16 17:29     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-09-11 17:04   ` Arjan van de Ven
2025-09-16 17:54     ` Sean Christopherson
2025-09-16 18:25       ` Jim Mattson
2025-09-17 13:48       ` Arjan van de Ven
2025-09-17 17:30       ` Xin Li
2025-09-17 22:40         ` Sean Christopherson

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=c29abf85-aafe-4cf8-b4e8-6d3b5b250ce6@linux.intel.com \
    --to=arjan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
    --cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=david.kaplan@amd.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kai.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pavel@kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xin@zytor.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