[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56B8AFAF.7090509@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 16:09:35 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Bruce Rogers <brogers@...e.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: jan.kiszka@...mens.com, namit@...technion.ac.il
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: fix ordering of cr0 initialization code in
vmx_cpu_reset
On 03/02/2016 23:51, Bruce Rogers wrote:
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> index e2951b6..21507b4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> @@ -4993,8 +4993,8 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool init_event)
> vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vmx->vpid);
>
> cr0 = X86_CR0_NW | X86_CR0_CD | X86_CR0_ET;
> - vmx_set_cr0(vcpu, cr0); /* enter rmode */
> vmx->vcpu.arch.cr0 = cr0;
> + vmx_set_cr0(vcpu, cr0); /* enter rmode */
Your comment that the assignment is redundant is correct, but I am
afraid that this fix is also wrong. In particular, it would not cause
exit_lmode and enter_rmode to be called.
You are not describing which call to kvm_mmu_reset_context was messed
up, so I'm not sure how your patch is fixing things.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists