From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751787AbeDDLyi (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2018 07:54:38 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:46312 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751698AbeDDLyg (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2018 07:54:36 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] KVM: X86: Introduce handle_ud() To: Wanpeng Li , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: Paolo Bonzini , =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Andrew Cooper , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Liran Alon References: <1522798129-14588-1-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com> <1522798129-14588-2-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: <9d68b1b4-04e6-46d6-70b4-6ebcb0a0c4aa@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:54:34 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1522798129-14588-2-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04.04.2018 01:28, Wanpeng Li wrote: > From: Wanpeng Li > > Introduce handle_ud() to handle invalid opcode, this function will be > used by later patches. > > Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > Reviewed-by: Liran Alon > Cc: Paolo Bonzini > Cc: Radim Krčmář > Cc: Andrew Cooper > Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > Cc: Liran Alon > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li > --- > arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 9 +-------- > arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 10 ++-------- > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > arch/x86/kvm/x86.h | 2 ++ > 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c > index f66fc2e..e0a3f56 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c > @@ -2676,14 +2676,7 @@ static int bp_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm) > > static int ud_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm) > { > - int er; > - > - er = emulate_instruction(&svm->vcpu, EMULTYPE_TRAP_UD); > - if (er == EMULATE_USER_EXIT) > - return 0; > - if (er != EMULATE_DONE) > - kvm_queue_exception(&svm->vcpu, UD_VECTOR); > - return 1; > + return handle_ud(&svm->vcpu); > } > > static int ac_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm) > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > index b2f8a70..0f11243 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > @@ -6436,14 +6436,8 @@ static int handle_exception(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > if (is_nmi(intr_info)) > return 1; /* already handled by vmx_vcpu_run() */ > > - if (is_invalid_opcode(intr_info)) { > - er = emulate_instruction(vcpu, EMULTYPE_TRAP_UD); > - if (er == EMULATE_USER_EXIT) > - return 0; > - if (er != EMULATE_DONE) > - kvm_queue_exception(vcpu, UD_VECTOR); > - return 1; > - } > + if (is_invalid_opcode(intr_info)) > + return handle_ud(vcpu); (maybe different on this branch) isn't "er" now unused? > > error_code = 0; > if (intr_info & INTR_INFO_DELIVER_CODE_MASK) > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > index 7d9a444..1eb495e 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > @@ -4840,6 +4840,19 @@ int kvm_write_guest_virt_system(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_write_guest_virt_system); > > +int handle_ud(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +{ > + enum emulation_result er; > + > + er = emulate_instruction(vcpu, EMULTYPE_TRAP_UD); > + if (er == EMULATE_USER_EXIT) > + return 0; > + if (er != EMULATE_DONE) > + kvm_queue_exception(vcpu, UD_VECTOR); > + return 1; I would now actually prefer if (er == EMULATE_DONE) return 1 ... Anyhow, Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand -- Thanks, David / dhildenb