[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YGNAQrWMl3AZQ3HG@google.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 15:14:10 +0000
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] x86/tdx: Handle MWAIT, MONITOR and WBINVD
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> > On Mar 29, 2021, at 7:04 PM, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> No, if these instructions take a #VE then they were executed at CPL=0. MONITOR
> >>> and MWAIT will #UD without VM-Exit->#VE. Same for WBINVD, s/#UD/#GP.
> >>
> >> Dare I ask about XSETBV?
> >
> > XGETBV does not cause a #VE, it just works normally. The guest has full
> > AVX capabilities.
> >
>
> X *SET* BV
Heh, XSETBV also works normally, relative to the features enumerated in CPUID.
XSAVES/XRSTORS support is fixed to '1' in the virtual CPU model. A subset of
the features managed by XSAVE can be hidden by the VMM, but attempting to enable
unsupported features will #GP (either from hardware or injected by TDX Module),
not #VE.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists