[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87zhw4nprh.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 19:16:02 +0200
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/9] x86/kvm/mmu.c: set get_pdptr hook in kvm_init_shadow_ept_mmu()
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 07:58:37PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> kvm_init_shadow_ept_mmu() doesn't set get_pdptr() hook and is this
>> not a problem just because MMU context is already initialized and this
>> hook points to kvm_pdptr_read(). As we're intended to use a dedicated
>> MMU for shadow EPT MMU set this hook explicitly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> index ca79ec0d8060..2bdc63f67886 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> @@ -4846,6 +4846,8 @@ void kvm_init_shadow_ept_mmu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool execonly,
>> context->root_level = PT64_ROOT_4LEVEL;
>> context->direct_map = false;
>> context->base_role.word = root_page_role.word & mmu_base_role_mask.word;
>> + context->get_pdptr = kvm_pdptr_read;
>
> Would it make sense to set this in nested_ept_init_mmu_context()
> along with set_cr3, get_cr3 and inject_page_fault? The other MMU
> flows set them as a package deal.
Well, kvm_init_shadow_ept_mmu() has only one call site and reading the
code I was under an impression we set set_cr3/get_cr3/inject_page_fault
in vmx.c just to avoid passing all these vmx-specific functions as
pointers to kvm_init_shadow_ept_mmu(). With get_pdptr() I was thinking
"oh, great, this is not vmx-specific so we can set it in mmu.c" - but I
see your point and I'm ready to budge :-)
>
> Either way...
>
> Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Thanks!
>
>> +
>> update_permission_bitmask(vcpu, context, true);
>> update_pkru_bitmask(vcpu, context, true);
>> update_last_nonleaf_level(vcpu, context);
--
Vitaly
Powered by blists - more mailing lists