On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 4:31 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Question: what do we want to do about nested? Due to differences between SVM > and VMX at the time you posted your patches, this series _as posted_ will do > nested passthrough for SVM, but not VMX (before the MSR rework, SVM auto-merged > bitmaps for all MSRs in svm_direct_access_msrs). > > As I've got it locally applied, neither SVM nor VMX will do passthrough to L2. > I'm leaning toward allowing full passthrough, because (a) it's easy, (b) I can't > think of any reason not to, and (c) SVM's semi-auto-merging logic means we could > *unintentinally* do full passthrough in the future, in the unlikely event that > KVM added passthrough support for an MSR in the same chunk as APERF and MPERF. I think full passthrough makes sense.
