RE: [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: nested TPR shadow/threshold emulation

[Zhang, Yang Z]

Paolo Bonzini wrote on 2014-08-01:
> Il 01/08/2014 02:57, Zhang, Yang Z ha scritto:
>>> 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.
> 
> Yes, you do need an "if (cpu_has_vmx_tpr_shadow())" around the
> vmcs_write32.  But still, checking nested_cpu_has is not strictly necessary.
> Right now they both are a single AND, but I have plans to change all
> of the
> cpu_has_*() checks to static keys.

See v2 patch. It isn't a problem anymore.

> 
> Paolo


Best regards,
Yang


--
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/