lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/8] x86/cpufeatures: Add AMD feature bits for Prediction Command
From
Date
On 22/01/18 14:31, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> On 1/21/2018 12:01 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 21/01/18 17:50, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>>> On 1/21/2018 3:49 AM, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>>> AMD doesn't implement the Speculation Control MSR that Intel does, but
>>>> the Prediction Control MSR does exist and is advertised by a separate
>>>> CPUID bit. Add support for that.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 +
>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c | 1 +
>>>> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>>> index 2efb8d4..8c9e5c0 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>>> @@ -207,6 +207,7 @@
>>>> #define X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE_AMD ( 7*32+13) /* AMD Retpoline mitigation for Spectre variant 2 */
>>>> #define X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PPIN ( 7*32+14) /* Intel Processor Inventory Number */
>>>>
>>>> +#define X86_FEATURE_AMD_PRED_CMD ( 7*32+17) /* Prediction Command MSR (AMD) */
>>>> #define X86_FEATURE_MBA ( 7*32+18) /* Memory Bandwidth Allocation */
>>>> #define X86_FEATURE_RSB_CTXSW ( 7*32+19) /* Fill RSB on context switches */
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
>>>> index df11f5d..4eb90b2 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
>>>> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = {
>>>> { X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE, CPUID_EDX, 7, 0x80000007, 0 },
>>>> { X86_FEATURE_CPB, CPUID_EDX, 9, 0x80000007, 0 },
>>>> { X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK, CPUID_EDX, 11, 0x80000007, 0 },
>>>> + { X86_FEATURE_AMD_PRED_CMD, CPUID_EBX, 12, 0x80000008, 0 },
>>> I replied to the previous version, but I'll add it here, too.
>>>
>>> This should be moved to the existing 0x80000008/EBX entry rather than have
>>> it in scattered.
>>>
>>> Also, there will be a total of three bits:
>>> IBPB: 0x80000008 EBX[12]
>>> IBRS: 0x80000008 EBX[14]
>>> STIBP: 0x80000008 EBX[15]
>>>
>>> Since IBRS and STIBP share the same MSR, if a processor only supports
>>> STIBP (MSR bit 1), for ease of software implementation the processor
>>> does not GP fault attempts to write bit 0. In a similar manner, if a
>>> processor only suppors IBRS (MSR bit 0), the processor does not GP
>>> fault attempts to write bit 1.
>> Are you able to comment on the read behaviour after a write which is
>> ignored?
>>
>> If the behaviour is "read as written" then virt cases are fine.  If the
>> "ignore" causes a zero to be read back, then we're still going to need
>> to intercept and emulate all VM accesses.
> The behavior is "read as written", so the bit will be updated even though
> the support for the bit is not present.

Fantastic!  Thanks for confirming.

~Andrew

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-22 15:33    [W:0.061 / U:2.668 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site