Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] KVM: x86: Add IBPB support

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 31/01/2018 12:39, Jim Mattson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> In fact this MSR can even be passed down unconditionally, since it needs
>> no save/restore and has no ill performance effect on the sibling
>> hyperthread.
> 
> I'm a bit surprised to hear that IBPB has no ill performance impact on
> the sibling hyperthread. On current CPUs, this has to flush the BTB,
> doesn't it? And since the BTB is shared between hyperthreads, doesn't
> the sibling lose all of its branch predictions?

Yeah, I knew about that, but I hadn't heard yet that it also blocks the
hyperthread while you do the write.  It makes sense in retrospect.

In any case, there's no difference (unlike IBRS) in the vmexit cost if
the MSR is passed through.

Paolo