From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B999C433EF for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:53:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241026AbhLMQxQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:53:16 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:29966 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231563AbhLMQxO (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:53:14 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1639414394; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=DR00qm4+umClllZ9CSbjkDci9NLaK9U/TcJkdgDx9Og=; b=iy+0fWpDHvJF1oUGqB+4PMQRQJ+rGJU2yslqeFBK0cgc3Ib6T5yzBdrX6Loe10bM1trDNc uAWEbEOpKHrlh1/e6uc0hEB8jQNmb1x4az/lVeekXIEuc7lHGgofCXJVdUMI6ausSWEWw6 zfEsbqpuScWNDvTSfU36KpOr93k/Rac= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-490-MnLxmh9TPIGIEsr_SQA1bA-1; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:53:12 -0500 X-MC-Unique: MnLxmh9TPIGIEsr_SQA1bA-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id u4-20020a5d4684000000b0017c8c1de97dso4052806wrq.16 for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 08:53:12 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=DR00qm4+umClllZ9CSbjkDci9NLaK9U/TcJkdgDx9Og=; b=HMsiQqTxLcXOKblWPgZWjzqaJQUy1eVaAAH+mMTqVIVOjklw0eVM8XL2765Sn98neN hmaC61Z8ckayVBV9uocc3MMq//U1djUArpk7CBiE3zwrOCrJmEmfSg2vs+C5rcEtj9y+ HqEymcFYTz7DboyDQ+MAMbUD3+L5X09EA2UzkQUw+HruUu+2LBOw3XBb9pTSBUsCtOfU UQAOb0BrDVcUV8qPCp4jezkfRi/eyVvSa5I0fHycDq9Kyn3eQQfAKlIsUhMpSxrKP8o+ xSTYtdPK2v2MJfxOg8VmvYPXKDaWdg2O+HDMfultNiNloonW1bA1cJESMjlAWWD8taHt fclg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533g8aIafXzFOYJIbUo8dm9FB5PnUOD4zVkGpstdTlpm8itfUjpC 6n4p4sXxDvVGkpmzxNYtuqirRoLzToA2UfCQ0ZdQN6ULUJNGasOMZNPgBT06whlBClnUYkGfjwx jhX9PllLwwzeNJpGtuttJ03xe X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c256:: with SMTP id b22mr38675475wmj.176.1639414391472; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 08:53:11 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy9Whyxn3/Nyu4vyyaWULQGY99yFCS5IGAccxzJM+sLywPnUZSW7c/PeU4WYzU/6rHILKdcSg== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c256:: with SMTP id b22mr38675451wmj.176.1639414391282; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 08:53:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from fedora (g-server-2.ign.cz. [91.219.240.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g16sm9196894wmq.20.2021.12.13.08.53.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 13 Dec 2021 08:53:10 -0800 (PST) From: Vitaly Kuznetsov To: Sean Christopherson , Paolo Bonzini Cc: Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hou Wenlong Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Inject #UD on "unsupported" hypercall if patching fails In-Reply-To: <20211210222903.3417968-1-seanjc@google.com> References: <20211210222903.3417968-1-seanjc@google.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:53:04 +0100 Message-ID: <87wnk8v43z.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sean Christopherson writes: > Ideally, KVM wouldn't patch at all; it's the guest's responsibility to > identify and use the correct hypercall instruction (VMCALL vs. VMMCALL). > Sadly, older Linux kernels prior to commit c1118b3602c2 ("x86: kvm: use > alternatives for VMCALL vs. VMMCALL if kernel text is read-only") do the > wrong thing and blindly use VMCALL, i.e. removing the patching would > break running VMs with older kernels. > FWIW, we also use hypercall patching for Hyper-V emulation (when HV_X64_MSR_HYPERCALL is written) and this complies with TLFS, we can't get rid of this. It's a different 'patching' though... -- Vitaly