[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210308080108.GA1160@local-michael-cet-test.sh.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 16:01:09 +0800
From: Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>, pbonzini@...hat.com,
vkuznets@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] KVM: nVMX: Sync L2 guest CET states between L1/L2
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 08:46:45AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2021, Yang Weijiang wrote:
> > @@ -3375,6 +3391,12 @@ enum nvmx_vmentry_status nested_vmx_enter_non_root_mode(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > if (kvm_mpx_supported() &&
> > !(vmcs12->vm_entry_controls & VM_ENTRY_LOAD_BNDCFGS))
> > vmx->nested.vmcs01_guest_bndcfgs = vmcs_read64(GUEST_BNDCFGS);
> > + if (kvm_cet_supported() &&
> > + !(vmcs12->vm_entry_controls & VM_ENTRY_LOAD_CET_STATE)) {
>
> Alignment.
>
> > + vmx->nested.vmcs01_guest_ssp = vmcs_readl(GUEST_SSP);
> > + vmx->nested.vmcs01_guest_s_cet = vmcs_readl(GUEST_S_CET);
> > + vmx->nested.vmcs01_guest_ssp_tbl = vmcs_readl(GUEST_INTR_SSP_TABLE);
> > + }
> >
> > /*
> > * Overwrite vmcs01.GUEST_CR3 with L1's CR3 if EPT is disabled *and*
> > @@ -4001,6 +4023,9 @@ static bool is_vmcs12_ext_field(unsigned long field)
> > case GUEST_IDTR_BASE:
> > case GUEST_PENDING_DBG_EXCEPTIONS:
> > case GUEST_BNDCFGS:
> > + case GUEST_SSP:
> > + case GUEST_INTR_SSP_TABLE:
> > + case GUEST_S_CET:
> > return true;
> > default:
> > break;
> > @@ -4052,6 +4077,11 @@ static void sync_vmcs02_to_vmcs12_rare(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > vmcs_readl(GUEST_PENDING_DBG_EXCEPTIONS);
> > if (kvm_mpx_supported())
> > vmcs12->guest_bndcfgs = vmcs_read64(GUEST_BNDCFGS);
> > + if (kvm_cet_supported()) {
>
> Isn't the existing kvm_mpx_supported() check wrong in the sense that KVM only
> needs to sync to vmcs12 if KVM and the guest both support MPX?
For MPX, if guest_cpuid_has() is not efficent, can it be checked by BNDCFGS EN bit?
E.g.:
if (kvm_mpx_supported() && (vmcs12->guest_bndcfgs & 1))
> Same would apply to CET. Not sure it'd be a net positive in terms of performance since
> guest_cpuid_has() can be quite slow, but overwriting vmcs12 fields that technically don't exist
> feels wrong.
For CET, can we get equivalent effect by checking vmcs12->guest_cr4.CET?
E.g.:
if (kvm_cet_supported() && (vmcs12->guest_cr4 & X86_CR4_CET))
>
> > + vmcs12->guest_ssp = vmcs_readl(GUEST_SSP);
> > + vmcs12->guest_s_cet = vmcs_readl(GUEST_S_CET);
> > + vmcs12->guest_ssp_tbl = vmcs_readl(GUEST_INTR_SSP_TABLE);
> > + }
> >
> > vmx->nested.need_sync_vmcs02_to_vmcs12_rare = false;
> > }
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
> > index 9d3a557949ac..36dc4fdb0909 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
> > @@ -155,6 +155,9 @@ struct nested_vmx {
> > /* to migrate it to L2 if VM_ENTRY_LOAD_DEBUG_CONTROLS is off */
> > u64 vmcs01_debugctl;
> > u64 vmcs01_guest_bndcfgs;
> > + u64 vmcs01_guest_ssp;
> > + u64 vmcs01_guest_s_cet;
> > + u64 vmcs01_guest_ssp_tbl;
> >
> > /* to migrate it to L1 if L2 writes to L1's CR8 directly */
> > int l1_tpr_threshold;
> > --
> > 2.26.2
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists