diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_asm.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
index 635fb154b33f9..a3633560493be 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
@@ -150,4 +150,7 @@
 
 #define KVM_INST_FETCH_FAILED	-1
 
+/* Extract PO and XOP opcode fields */
+#define PO_XOP_OPCODE_MASK 0xfc0007fe
+
 #endif /* __POWERPC_KVM_ASM_H__ */
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c
index 0db9374971697..cc90b8b823291 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm.c
@@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
  * Copyright 2017 Paul Mackerras, IBM Corp. <paulus@au1.ibm.com>
  */
 
+#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
+
 #include <linux/kvm_host.h>
 
 #include <asm/kvm_ppc.h>
@@ -44,7 +46,18 @@ int kvmhv_p9_tm_emulation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	u64 newmsr, bescr;
 	int ra, rs;
 
-	switch (instr & 0xfc0007ff) {
+	/*
+	 * rfid, rfebb, and mtmsrd encode bit 31 = 0 since it's a reserved bit
+	 * in these instructions, so masking bit 31 out doesn't change these
+	 * instructions. For treclaim., tsr., and trechkpt. instructions if bit
+	 * 31 = 0 then they are per ISA invalid forms, however P9 UM, in section
+	 * 4.6.10 Book II Invalid Forms, informs specifically that ignoring bit
+	 * 31 is an acceptable way to handle these invalid forms that have
+	 * bit 31 = 0. Moreover, for emulation purposes both forms (w/ and wo/
+	 * bit 31 set) can generate a softpatch interrupt. Hence both forms
+	 * are handled below for these instructions so they behave the same way.
+	 */
+	switch (instr & PO_XOP_OPCODE_MASK) {
 	case PPC_INST_RFID:
 		/* XXX do we need to check for PR=0 here? */
 		newmsr = vcpu->arch.shregs.srr1;
@@ -105,7 +118,8 @@ int kvmhv_p9_tm_emulation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 		vcpu->arch.shregs.msr = newmsr;
 		return RESUME_GUEST;
 
-	case PPC_INST_TSR:
+	/* ignore bit 31, see comment above */
+	case (PPC_INST_TSR & PO_XOP_OPCODE_MASK):
 		/* check for PR=1 and arch 2.06 bit set in PCR */
 		if ((msr & MSR_PR) && (vcpu->arch.vcore->pcr & PCR_ARCH_206)) {
 			/* generate an illegal instruction interrupt */
@@ -140,7 +154,8 @@ int kvmhv_p9_tm_emulation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 		vcpu->arch.shregs.msr = msr;
 		return RESUME_GUEST;
 
-	case PPC_INST_TRECLAIM:
+	/* ignore bit 31, see comment above */
+	case (PPC_INST_TRECLAIM & PO_XOP_OPCODE_MASK):
 		/* check for TM disabled in the HFSCR or MSR */
 		if (!(vcpu->arch.hfscr & HFSCR_TM)) {
 			/* generate an illegal instruction interrupt */
@@ -176,7 +191,8 @@ int kvmhv_p9_tm_emulation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 		vcpu->arch.shregs.msr &= ~MSR_TS_MASK;
 		return RESUME_GUEST;
 
-	case PPC_INST_TRECHKPT:
+	/* ignore bit 31, see comment above */
+	case (PPC_INST_TRECHKPT & PO_XOP_OPCODE_MASK):
 		/* XXX do we need to check for PR=0 here? */
 		/* check for TM disabled in the HFSCR or MSR */
 		if (!(vcpu->arch.hfscr & HFSCR_TM)) {
@@ -208,6 +224,8 @@ int kvmhv_p9_tm_emulation(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	}
 
 	/* What should we do here? We didn't recognize the instruction */
-	WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
+	kvmppc_core_queue_program(vcpu, SRR1_PROGILL);
+	pr_warn_ratelimited("Unrecognized TM-related instruction %#x for emulation", instr);
+
 	return RESUME_GUEST;
 }
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm_builtin.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm_builtin.c
index 217246279dfae..fad931f224efd 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm_builtin.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_tm_builtin.c
@@ -23,7 +23,18 @@ int kvmhv_p9_tm_emulation_early(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 	u64 newmsr, msr, bescr;
 	int rs;
 
-	switch (instr & 0xfc0007ff) {
+	/*
+	 * rfid, rfebb, and mtmsrd encode bit 31 = 0 since it's a reserved bit
+	 * in these instructions, so masking bit 31 out doesn't change these
+	 * instructions. For the tsr. instruction if bit 31 = 0 then it is per
+	 * ISA an invalid form, however P9 UM, in section 4.6.10 Book II Invalid
+	 * Forms, informs specifically that ignoring bit 31 is an acceptable way
+	 * to handle TM-related invalid forms that have bit 31 = 0. Moreover,
+	 * for emulation purposes both forms (w/ and wo/ bit 31 set) can
+	 * generate a softpatch interrupt. Hence both forms are handled below
+	 * for tsr. to make them behave the same way.
+	 */
+	switch (instr & PO_XOP_OPCODE_MASK) {
 	case PPC_INST_RFID:
 		/* XXX do we need to check for PR=0 here? */
 		newmsr = vcpu->arch.shregs.srr1;
@@ -73,7 +84,8 @@ int kvmhv_p9_tm_emulation_early(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 		vcpu->arch.shregs.msr = newmsr;
 		return 1;
 
-	case PPC_INST_TSR:
+	/* ignore bit 31, see comment above */
+	case (PPC_INST_TSR & PO_XOP_OPCODE_MASK):
 		/* we know the MSR has the TS field = S (0b01) here */
 		msr = vcpu->arch.shregs.msr;
 		/* check for PR=1 and arch 2.06 bit set in PCR */
