RE: [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: nested TPR shadow/threshold emulation
From: Zhang, Yang Z
Date: Thu Jul 31 2014 - 20:57:20 EST
Paolo Bonzini wrote on 2014-07-31:
> Il 31/07/2014 10:03, Wanpeng Li ha scritto:
>>> One thing:
>>>> + if (nested_cpu_has(vmcs12, CPU_BASED_TPR_SHADOW))
>>>> + vmcs_write32(TPR_THRESHOLD, vmcs12->tpr_threshold);
>>> I think you can just do this write unconditionally, since most
>>> hypervisors will enable this. Also, you probably can add the tpr
>> What will happen if a hypervisor doesn't enable it? I make it more
>> cleaner in version two.
> TPR_THRESHOLD will be likely written as zero, but the processor will
> never use it anyway. It's just a small optimization because
> nested_cpu_has(vmcs12, CPU_BASED_TPR_SHADOW) will almost always be true.
Theoretically, you are right. But we should not expect all VMMs follow it. It is not worth to violate the SDM just for saving two or three instructions' cost.
>>> threshold field to the read-write fields for shadow VMCS.
>> Wanpeng Li
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/