Re: [PATCH 3/7] kvm: vmx: pass MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL and MSR_IA32_PRED_CMD down to the guest

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 09/01/2018 00:58, Liran Alon wrote:
> 
> ----- pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>,
>> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Cc: jmattson@xxxxxxxxxx, aliguori@xxxxxxxxxx, "thomas lendacky"
>> <thomas.lendacky@xxxxxxx>, bp@xxxxxxxxx
>>> Sent: Monday, January 8, 2018 8:41:07 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] kvm: vmx: pass MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL and
>> MSR_IA32_PRED_CMD down to the guest
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 19:08 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂif (have_spec_ctrl && vmx->spec_ctrl != 0)
>>>> +ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂwrmsrl(MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, vmx->spec_ctrl);
>>>> +
>>>
>>> I think this one probably *is* safe even without an 'else lfence',
>>> which means that the CPU can speculate around it, but it wants a
>>> comment explaining that someone has properly analysed it and saying
>>> precisely why.
>>
>> This one is okay as long as there are no indirect jumps until
>> vmresume.  But the one on vmexit is only okay because right now
>> it's *disabling* IBRS.  Once IBRS is used by Linux, we'll need an
>> lfence there.  I'll add a comment.
>>
>> Paolo
> 
> That is true but from what I understand, there is an indirect branch from this point until vmresume.
> That indirect branch resides in atomic_switch_perf_msrs() immediately called after this WRMSR:
> atomic_switch_perf_msrs() -> perf_guest_get_msrs() -> x86_pmu.guest_get_msrs().

Sure, it has to move later as pointed out by other reviewers.

Paolo