>>> On 25.05.18 at 17:25, wrote:
> On 24/05/18 11:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.05.18 at 12:13, wrote:
>>> On 24/05/18 09:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 24.05.18 at 00:09, wrote:
> It is, as documented,
On 24/05/18 11:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 24.05.18 at 12:13, wrote:
>> On 24/05/18 09:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 24.05.18 at 00:09, wrote:
It is, as documented, not completely strictly true (according to the
latest
>>> On 24.05.18 at 12:13, wrote:
> On 24/05/18 09:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.05.18 at 00:09, wrote:
>>> It is, as documented, not completely strictly true (according to the
>>> latest revision of the spec), but is there deliberately
On 24/05/18 09:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 24.05.18 at 00:09, wrote:
>> It is, as documented, not completely strictly true (according to the
>> latest revision of the spec), but is there deliberately to simply so we
>> don't give the guest implausible configurations.
>>> On 24.05.18 at 00:09, wrote:
> It is, as documented, not completely strictly true (according to the
> latest revision of the spec), but is there deliberately to simply so we
> don't give the guest implausible configurations. There is not a
> processor with STIBP
On 23/05/2018 23:53, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 05/23/2018 06:34 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 23/05/2018 23:27, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> On 05/23/2018 06:09 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 23/05/2018 22:59, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 05/23/2018 05:49 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On
On 05/23/2018 06:34 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 23/05/2018 23:27, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 05/23/2018 06:09 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2018 22:59, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 05/23/2018 05:49 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 23/05/2018 22:40, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>
On 23/05/2018 23:27, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 05/23/2018 06:09 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 23/05/2018 22:59, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> On 05/23/2018 05:49 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 23/05/2018 22:40, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> Looking at vmx_cpuid_policy_changed():
>
>
>
On 05/23/2018 06:09 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 23/05/2018 22:59, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 05/23/2018 05:49 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 23/05/2018 22:40, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
Looking at vmx_cpuid_policy_changed():
if ( cp->feat.ibrsb )
On 23/05/2018 22:59, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 05/23/2018 05:49 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 23/05/2018 22:40, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> Looking at vmx_cpuid_policy_changed():
>>>
>>>
>>> if ( cp->feat.ibrsb )
>>> vmx_clear_msr_intercept(v, MSR_SPEC_CTRL, VMX_MSR_RW);
>>> else
On 05/23/2018 05:49 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 23/05/2018 22:40, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> Looking at vmx_cpuid_policy_changed():
>>
>>
>> if ( cp->feat.ibrsb )
>> vmx_clear_msr_intercept(v, MSR_SPEC_CTRL, VMX_MSR_RW);
>> else
>> vmx_set_msr_intercept(v, MSR_SPEC_CTRL,
On 23/05/2018 22:40, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> Looking at vmx_cpuid_policy_changed():
>
>
> if ( cp->feat.ibrsb )
> vmx_clear_msr_intercept(v, MSR_SPEC_CTRL, VMX_MSR_RW);
> else
> vmx_set_msr_intercept(v, MSR_SPEC_CTRL, VMX_MSR_RW);
>
>
> Is there a reason why we are not
Looking at vmx_cpuid_policy_changed():
if ( cp->feat.ibrsb )
vmx_clear_msr_intercept(v, MSR_SPEC_CTRL, VMX_MSR_RW);
else
vmx_set_msr_intercept(v, MSR_SPEC_CTRL, VMX_MSR_RW);
Is there a reason why we are not checking cp->feat.ssbd as well?
-boris
13 matches
Mail list logo