From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 17/17] kvm: vmx: Emulate TEST_CTL MSR
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:21:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <330cd5ec-813b-8835-2178-32e14190b9e6@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b7a879103eb409bea3f2664d7e7a8b1787768cf2.camel@linux.intel.com>
On 11/03/19 16:10, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 14:31 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 09/03/19 03:31, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
>>> Hi, Paolo,
>>>
>>> Do you have any comments on this patch?
>>>
>>> We are preparing v5 patches for split lock detection, if you have any
>>> comments
>>> about this one, please let me know.
>>
>> No, my only comment is that it should be placed _before_ the other two
>> for bisectability. I think I have already sent that small remark.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Paolo
>
> I cannot find the small remark you sent before. Maybe I missed something.
> But I'am confused why it should be placed _before_ the other two. This patch
> just use the vmx->core_capability that defined it the previous patch.
Because otherwise the guest can see core_capability != 0 and will #GP
when trying to use split lock detection.
But you are right, this patch must be the last. Instead,
kvm-get_core_capability() should always return 0 until the previous
patch. Then in this patch you add the rdmsr and boot_cpu_has() tests.
Paolo
>>>> + if (!(vmx->core_capability & CORE_CAP_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT))
>>>> + return 1;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (data & ~TEST_CTL_ENABLE_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT)
>>>> + return 1;
>>>> + vmx->msr_test_ctl = data;
>>>> + break;
>>>> case MSR_EFER:
>>>> ret = kvm_set_msr_common(vcpu, msr_info);
>>>> break;
>>>> @@ -4108,6 +4122,9 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_setup(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>>>>
>>>> vmx->arch_capabilities = kvm_get_arch_capabilities();
>>>>
>>>> + /* disable AC split lock by default */
>>>> + vmx->msr_test_ctl = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> vm_exit_controls_init(vmx, vmx_vmexit_ctrl());
>>>>
>>>> /* 22.2.1, 20.8.1 */
>>>> @@ -4145,6 +4162,7 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>>> bool
>>>> init_event)
>>>>
>>>> vmx->rmode.vm86_active = 0;
>>>> vmx->spec_ctrl = 0;
>>>> + vmx->msr_test_ctl = 0;
>>>>
>>>> vcpu->arch.microcode_version = 0x100000000ULL;
>>>> vmx->vcpu.arch.regs[VCPU_REGS_RDX] = get_rdx_init_val();
>>>> @@ -6344,6 +6362,21 @@ static void atomic_switch_perf_msrs(struct vcpu_vmx
>>>> *vmx)
>>>> msrs[i].host, false);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static void atomic_switch_msr_test_ctl(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>>>> +{
>>>> + u64 host_msr_test_ctl;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT))
>>>> + return;
>>>> +
>>>> + rdmsrl(MSR_TEST_CTL, host_msr_test_ctl);
>>>> + if (host_msr_test_ctl == vmx->msr_test_ctl)
>>>> + clear_atomic_switch_msr(vmx, MSR_TEST_CTL);
>>>> + else
>>>> + add_atomic_switch_msr(vmx, MSR_TEST_CTL, vmx->msr_test_ctl,
>>>> + host_msr_test_ctl, false);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static void vmx_arm_hv_timer(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx, u32 val)
>>>> {
>>>> vmcs_write32(VMX_PREEMPTION_TIMER_VALUE, val);
>>>> @@ -6585,6 +6618,8 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>>>
>>>> atomic_switch_perf_msrs(vmx);
>>>>
>>>> + atomic_switch_msr_test_ctl(vmx);
>>>> +
>>>> vmx_update_hv_timer(vcpu);
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
>>>> index cc22379991f3..e8831609c6c3 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
>>>> @@ -191,6 +191,7 @@ struct vcpu_vmx {
>>>> u64 msr_guest_kernel_gs_base;
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>> + u64 msr_test_ctl;
>>>> u64 core_capability;
>>>> u64 arch_capabilities;
>>>> u64 spec_ctrl;
>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-11 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-02 2:44 [PATCH v4 00/17] x86/split_lock: Enable #AC exception for split locked accesses Fenghua Yu
2019-03-02 2:44 ` [PATCH v4 01/17] x86/common: Align cpu_caps_cleared and cpu_caps_set to unsigned long Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 8:33 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-04 10:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-04 10:48 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-04 12:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-04 13:13 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-02 2:44 ` [PATCH v4 02/17] drivers/net/b44: Align pwol_mask to unsigned long for better performance Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 10:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-04 14:45 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 15:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-02 2:44 ` [PATCH v4 03/17] wlcore: Align reg_ch_conf_pending and tmp_ch_bitmap " Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 10:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-04 10:46 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-04 12:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-04 13:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-04 13:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-04 14:40 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 15:54 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-02 2:44 ` [PATCH v4 04/17] x86/split_lock: Align x86_capability to unsigned long to avoid split locked access Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 18:52 ` Dave Hansen
2019-03-04 19:15 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 19:29 ` Dave Hansen
2019-03-04 20:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-04 20:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-02 2:44 ` [PATCH v4 05/17] x86/cpufeatures: Enumerate IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES MSR Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 18:53 ` Dave Hansen
2019-03-04 18:55 ` Yu, Fenghua
2019-03-04 19:01 ` Dave Hansen
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 06/17] x86/msr-index: Define IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY MSR and #AC exception for split lock bit Fenghua Yu
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 07/17] x86/split_lock: Enumerate #AC for split lock by MSR IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 18:58 ` Dave Hansen
2019-03-04 18:59 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 19:19 ` Dave Hansen
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 08/17] x86/clearcpuid: Support multiple clearcpuid options Fenghua Yu
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 09/17] x86/clearcpuid: Support feature flag string in kernel option clearcpuid Fenghua Yu
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 10/17] x86/clearcpuid: Apply cleared feature bits that are forced set before Fenghua Yu
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 11/17] x86/clearcpuid: Clear CPUID bit in CPUID faulting Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 22:04 ` kbuild test robot
2019-03-05 7:27 ` kbuild test robot
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 12/17] Change document for kernel option clearcpuid Fenghua Yu
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 13/17] x86/split_lock: Handle #AC exception for split lock Fenghua Yu
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 14/17] x86/split_lock: Add a sysfs interface to allow user to enable or disable split lock detection on all CPUs during run time Fenghua Yu
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 15/17] kvm: x86: Report CORE_CAPABILITY on GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 8:38 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-04 10:47 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-04 10:49 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-04 11:10 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-04 11:14 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-04 11:21 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-05 7:03 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 16/17] kvm: x86: Add support IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY MSR Fenghua Yu
2019-03-04 8:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-04 12:32 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-08 6:10 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-08 7:54 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-08 8:03 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-02 2:45 ` [PATCH v4 17/17] kvm: vmx: Emulate TEST_CTL MSR Fenghua Yu
2019-03-09 2:31 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-11 13:31 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-03-11 15:10 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-11 15:21 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2019-03-11 16:58 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-03-04 21:55 ` [PATCH v4 00/17] x86/split_lock: Enable #AC exception for split locked accesses Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2019-03-05 0:06 ` Fenghua Yu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=330cd5ec-813b-8835-2178-32e14190b9e6@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xiaoyao.li@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®