[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2064be05-4286-e3d5-cd22-13fd957b7003@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 23:55:33 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Roman Kagan <rkagan@...tuozzo.com>,
"K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
"Michael Kelley (EOSG)" <Michael.H.Kelley@...rosoft.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/13] KVM: nVMX: optimize prepare_vmcs02{,_full} for
Enlightened VMCS case
On 16/10/2018 18:50, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> + if (!hv_evmcs || !(hv_evmcs->hv_clean_fields &
> + HV_VMX_ENLIGHTENED_CLEAN_FIELD_GUEST_GRP2)) {
> + vmcs_write16(GUEST_CS_SELECTOR, vmcs12->guest_cs_selector);
> + vmcs_write32(GUEST_CS_LIMIT, vmcs12->guest_cs_limit);
> + vmcs_write32(GUEST_CS_AR_BYTES, vmcs12->guest_cs_ar_bytes);
> + vmcs_writel(GUEST_ES_BASE, vmcs12->guest_es_base);
> + vmcs_writel(GUEST_CS_BASE, vmcs12->guest_cs_base);
> + }
For what it's worth, I suspect that these can be moved to
prepare_vmcs02_full. The initial implementation of shadow VMCS did not
expose "unrestricted guest" to the L1 hypervisor, and emulation does a
lot of accesses to CS (of course). Not sure how ES base ended up in
there and not DS base, though...
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists