Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: nVMX: accurate emulation of MSR_IA32_CR{0,4}_FIXED1

From	David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: nVMX: accurate emulation of MSR_IA32_CR{0,4}_FIXED1
Date	2016-11-28 23:00 +0100
Message-ID	<sIC7T-7Cs-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <sGLfj-uo-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <sGLoZ-xy-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <sGNTQ-2bH-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <sGO3v-2iP-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <sGP9f-2Vz-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 3:28 PM, David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 23/11/2016 23:07, David Matlack wrote:
>>> A downside of this scheme is we'd have to remember to update
>>> nested_vmx_cr4_fixed1_update() before giving VMs new CPUID bits. If we
>>> forget, a VM could end up with different values for CR{0,4}_FIXED0 for
>>> the same CPUID depending on which version of KVM you're running on.

I've realized my concern here doesn't make sense. Such a VM would
likely fail to enter VMX operation, or #GP (unexpectedly) at some
point later. Linux, for example, does not appear to consult
MSR_IA32_VMX_CR4_FIXED1 when determining which bits of CR4 it can use
(regardless of whether it is in VMX operation or not).

>>
>> If userspace doesn't obey KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID, all bets are off
>> anyway, so I don't think it's a big deal.  However, if you want to make
>> it generated by userspace, that would be fine as well!
>
> Ok let's generate them in userspace.

I'm more inclined to generate them in the kernel, given the above.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: nVMX: accurate emulation of MSR_IA32_CR{0,4}_FIXED1 David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> - 2016-11-28 23:00 +0100

csiph-web