From: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@amd.com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 0/3] Distinguish between variants of IBPB
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 10:32:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240913173242.3271406-1-jmattson@google.com> (raw)
Prior to Zen4, AMD's IBPB did not flush the RAS (or, in Intel
terminology, the RSB). Hence, the older version of AMD's IBPB was not
equivalent to Intel's IBPB. However, KVM has been treating them as
equivalent, synthesizing Intel's CPUID.(EAX=7,ECX=0):EDX[bit 26] on any
platform that supports the synthetic features X86_FEATURE_IBPB and
X86_FEATURE_IBRS.
Equivalence also requires a previously ignored feature on the AMD side,
CPUID Fn8000_0008_EBX[IBPB_RET], which is enumerated on Zen4.
v4: Added "guaranteed" to X86_FEATURE_IBPB comment [Pawan]
Changed logic for deducing AMD IBPB features from Intel IBPB features
in kvm_set_cpu_caps [Tom]
Intel CPUs that suffer from PBRSB can't claim AMD_IBPB_RET [myself]
v3: Pass through IBPB_RET from hardware to userspace. [Tom]
Derive AMD_IBPB from X86_FEATURE_SPEC_CTRL rather than
X86_FEATURE_IBPB. [Tom]
Clarify semantics of X86_FEATURE_IBPB.
v2: Use IBPB_RET to identify semantic equality. [Venkatesh]
Jim Mattson (3):
x86/cpufeatures: Define X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBPB_RET
KVM: x86: Advertise AMD_IBPB_RET to userspace
KVM: x86: AMD's IBPB is not equivalent to Intel's IBPB
arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 3 ++-
arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 12 +++++++++---
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--
2.46.0.662.g92d0881bb0-goog
next reply other threads:[~2024-09-13 17:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-13 17:32 Jim Mattson [this message]
2024-09-13 17:32 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] x86/cpufeatures: Define X86_FEATURE_AMD_IBPB_RET Jim Mattson
2024-10-07 14:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-10-07 17:38 ` Jim Mattson
2024-09-13 17:32 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM: x86: Advertise AMD_IBPB_RET to userspace Jim Mattson
2024-09-13 17:32 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: x86: AMD's IBPB is not equivalent to Intel's IBPB Jim Mattson
2024-09-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] Distinguish between variants of IBPB Jim Mattson
2024-09-30 16:19 ` Sean Christopherson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240913173242.3271406-1-jmattson@google.com \
--to=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=kai.huang@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=sandipan.das@amd.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®