[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44b102eb-ea74-7f19-3f4a-41dfc298d372@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 13:51:23 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 01/39] KVM: x86: fix Xen hypercall page msr handling
On 22/02/19 02:30, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> if (kvm_advertise_kvm()) {
> if (<handle kvm msr>)
> return ...;
> } else if (kvm_advertise_hyperv()) {
> if (<handle hyperv msr>)
> return ...;
> } else if (kvm_advertise_xen()) {
> if (<handle xen msrs>)
> return ...;
> }
>
> <fall through to main switch statement>
>
> Obviously assumes KVM only advertises itself as one hypervisor, and so
> the ordering is arbitrary.
No, KVM can advertise as both KVM and Hyper-V. CPUID 0x40000000 is used
for Hyper-V, while 0x40000100 is used for KVM. The MSRs do not conflict.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists