From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Naveen N Rao <naveen@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Sairaj Kodilkar <sarunkod@amd.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Xin Li (Intel)" <xin@zytor.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>,
Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] x86/cpu/topology: Work around the nuances of virtualization on AMD/Hygon
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 15:29:04 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aKWcaPyal4mDfy3J@BLRRASHENOY1.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <97aace4c-921f-4037-b8f2-c4112b4a26a9@amd.com>
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 02:42:26PM +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> Hello Boris,
>
> On 8/20/2025 2:29 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 01:41:28PM +0530, Naveen N Rao wrote:
> >> That suggests use of leaf 0xb for the initial x2APIC ID especially
> >> during early init. I'm not sure why leaf 0x8000001e was preferred over
> >> leaf 0xb in commit c749ce393b8f ("x86/cpu: Use common topology code for
> >> AMD") though.
> >
> > Well, I see parse_topology_amd() calling cpu_parse_topology_ext() if you have
> > TOPOEXT - which all AMD hw does - which then does cpu_parse_topology_ext() and
> > that one tries 0x80000026 and then falls back to 0xb and *only* *then* to
> > 0x8000001e.
> >
> > So, it looks like it DTRT to me...
>
> But parse_8000_001e() then unconditionally overwrites the
> "initial_apicid" with the value in 0x8000001E EAX despite it being
> populated from cpu_parse_topology_ext().
>
> The flow is as follows:
>
> parse_topology_amd()
> if (X86_FEATURE_TOPOEXT) /* True */
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> cpu_parse_topology_ext();
Patch 2 from this patchset, which removes this "if" condition above
seems to be the right thing to do.
X86_FEATURE_TOPOEXT refers to CPUID 0x80000001.ECX[22] which advertises the support for 0x8000001D.EAX
and 0x8000001E.EAX.
OTOH, the function cpu_parse_topology_ext() parses the topology via the following CPUIDs in that order
* CPUID 0x1f (Intel Only)
* CPUID 0x80000026 (AMD only)
* CPUID 0xB (Both Intel and AMD)
None of these have anything to do with X86_FEATURE_TOPOEXT.
So the call to cpu_parse_topology_ext() in parse_topology_amd()
doesn't have to be gated by the presence or absence of
X86_FEATURE_TOPOEXT.
I agree that QEMU needs to sort out what needs to do something better
than clearing all the regs of CPUID 0x8000001E on encountering a
topology with more than 256 cores.
Or at the very least not clear the CPUID 0x8000001E.EAX which has the
provision to advertise a valid Extended APIC ID.
--
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-20 9:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-18 6:04 K Prateek Nayak
2025-08-18 6:04 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] x86/msr-index: Define AMD64_CPUID_FN_EXT MSR K Prateek Nayak
2025-08-18 6:04 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] x86/cpu/topology: Use initial APICID from XTOPOEXT on AMD/HYGON K Prateek Nayak
2025-08-18 6:04 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] x86/cpu/topology: Always try cpu_parse_topology_ext() on AMD/Hygon K Prateek Nayak
2025-08-18 6:04 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] x86/cpu/topology: Check for X86_FEATURE_XTOPOLOGY instead of passing has_topoext K Prateek Nayak
2025-08-24 13:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-08-24 14:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-08-25 4:05 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-08-19 11:34 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] x86/cpu/topology: Work around the nuances of virtualization on AMD/Hygon Borislav Petkov
2025-08-19 14:28 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-08-19 21:24 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-08-20 8:11 ` Naveen N Rao
2025-08-20 8:59 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-08-20 9:12 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-08-20 9:28 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-08-20 9:59 ` Gautham R. Shenoy [this message]
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=aKWcaPyal4mDfy3J@BLRRASHENOY1.amd.com \
--to=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=naveen@kernel.org \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sarunkod@amd.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xin@zytor.com \
/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®