Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Enable MSR-BASED TPR shadow even if w/o APICv

[Wanpeng Li]

2016-09-14 20:03 GMT+08:00 Radim KrÄmÃÅ <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> 2016-09-14 11:40+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
>> On 14/09/2016 09:58, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> I observed that kvmvapic(to optimize flexpriority=N or AMD) is used
>>> to boost TPR access when testing kvm-unit-test/eventinj.flat tpr case
>>> on my haswell desktop (w/ flexpriority, w/o APICv). Commit (8d14695f9542
>>> x86, apicv: add virtual x2apic support) disable virtual x2apic mode
>>> completely if w/o APICv, and the author also told me that windows guest
>>> can't enter into x2apic mode when he developed the APICv feature several
>>> years ago. However, it is not truth currently, Interrupt Remapping and
>>> vIOMMU is added to qemu and the developers from Intel test windows 8 can
>>> work in x2apic mode w/ Interrupt Remapping enabled recently.
>>>
>>> This patch enables TPR shadow for virtual x2apic mode to boost
>>> windows guest in x2apic mode even if w/o APICv.
>>>
>>> Can pass the kvm-unit-test.
>>
>> Ok, now I see what you meant; this actually makes sense.  I don't expect
>> much speedup though, because Linux doesn't touch the TPR and Windows is
>> likely going to use the Hyper-V APIC MSRs when APICv is disabled.  For
>> this reason I'm not sure if the patch is useful in practice.
>
> I agree with Paolo on the use case -- what configurations benefit from
> this change?
>
>> To test this patch, you have to run kvm-unit-tests with Hyper-V
>> synthetic interrupt enabled.  Did you do this?
>
> The patch is buggy.  MSR bitmaps are global and we'd have a CVE if one
> guests used synic (=> disabled apicv) and one didn't.
> You'd want a new set of bitmaps and assign them in vmx_set_msr_bitmap()
> (or completely rewrite our management).

Do you think introduce per-VM x2apic msr bitmap make sense?

Regards,
Wanpeng Li