Re: [PATCH RFC 00/10] Intel EPT-Based Sub-page Write Protection Support.

[Yi Zhang]

On 2017-11-10 at 16:39:27 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 04/11/2017 17:54, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 04/11/2017 01:12, Yi Zhang wrote:
> >>>
> >> Adding Ravi, 
> >>
> >> Does anyone have further comments on current implementation, it is a
> >> important feature in our next generation chip-set.
> > 
> > What matters is not the feature, but the use case; without a use case,
> > there is no point in including code for SPP in KVM.  KVM doesn't use
> > VMFUNC or #VE for example, because they are not necessary.
> > 
> > SPP may become useful once we have the introspection interface.  Or, if
> > another hypervisor uses it, support for nested SPP may be useful (for
> > example we support nested VMFUNC and should get nested #VE sooner or
> > later, even though the features are not used on bare metal).
> > 
> > Right now, however, supporting SPP does not seem to be particularly
> > important honestly.
> 
> Hi Yi Zhang,
> 
> are you going to work on nested SPP?  I guess that would be most useful
> way to add SPP support to KVM (and you could also test it with
> kvm-unit-tests).
Hi Paolo,

We Haven't planing on the nested support yet, so far there are many hardware
assistance work on current SPP implemetation, and apply it in next
generration icelake chip-set.

Regards
Yi.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo