Re: [PATCH v5 06/13] KVM: x86/vmx: Save/Restore host MSR_ARCH_LBR_CTL state

[Yang Weijiang]

On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 10:20:04AM -0700, Jim Mattson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 3:19 AM Like Xu <like.xu.linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/7/2021 5:53 pm, Yang Weijiang wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 04:41:30PM -0700, Jim Mattson wrote:
> > >> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 3:54 PM Jim Mattson <jmattson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 2:51 AM Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If host is using MSR_ARCH_LBR_CTL then save it before vm-entry
> > >>>> and reload it after vm-exit.
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't see anything being done here "before VM-entry" or "after
> > >>> VM-exit." This code seems to be invoked on vcpu_load and vcpu_put.
> > >>>
> > >>> In any case, I don't see why this one MSR is special. It seems that if
> > >>> the host is using the architectural LBR MSRs, then *all* of the host
> > >>> architectural LBR MSRs have to be saved on vcpu_load and restored on
> > >>> vcpu_put. Shouldn't  kvm_load_guest_fpu() and kvm_put_guest_fpu() do
> > >>> that via the calls to kvm_save_current_fpu(vcpu->arch.user_fpu) and
> > >>> restore_fpregs_from_fpstate(&vcpu->arch.user_fpu->state)?
> > >>
> > >> It does seem like there is something special about IA32_LBR_DEPTH, though...
> > >>
> > >> Section 7.3.1 of the Intel® Architecture Instruction Set Extensions
> > >> and Future Features Programming Reference
> > >> says, "IA32_LBR_DEPTH is saved by XSAVES, but it is not written by
> > >> XRSTORS in any circumstance." It seems like that would require some
> > >> special handling if the host depth and the guest depth do not match.
> > > In our vPMU design, guest depth is alway kept the same as that of host,
> > > so this won't be a problem. But I'll double check the code again, thanks!
> >
> > KVM only exposes the host's depth value to the user space
> > so the guest can only use the same depth as the host.
> 
> The allowed depth supplied by KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID isn't enforced,
> though, is it?
Do you mean to enforce a check to depth written from user space via KVM_SET_CPUID2?