[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <05faffb4-c22d-1cd5-7582-823de9dd109a@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 14:59:47 +0800
From: Zeng Guang <guang.zeng@...el.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@....com>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>,
"Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Hu, Robert" <robert.hu@...el.com>,
"Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>,
Robert Hoo <robert.hu@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] KVM: VMX: Detect Tertiary VM-Execution control when
setup VMCS config
On 7/29/2021 8:03 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2021, Zeng Guang wrote:
>> @@ -4204,6 +4234,13 @@ vmx_adjust_secondary_exec_control(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx, u32 *exec_control,
>> #define vmx_adjust_sec_exec_exiting(vmx, exec_control, lname, uname) \
>> vmx_adjust_sec_exec_control(vmx, exec_control, lname, uname, uname##_EXITING, true)
>>
>> +static void vmx_compute_tertiary_exec_control(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>> +{
>> + u32 exec_control = vmcs_config.cpu_based_3rd_exec_ctrl;
> This is incorrectly truncating the value.
>
>> +
>> + vmx->tertiary_exec_control = exec_control;
>> +}
>> +
>> static void vmx_compute_secondary_exec_control(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>> {
>> struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu = &vmx->vcpu;
>> @@ -4319,6 +4356,11 @@ static void init_vmcs(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
>> secondary_exec_controls_set(vmx, vmx->secondary_exec_control);
>> }
>>
>> + if (cpu_has_tertiary_exec_ctrls()) {
>> + vmx_compute_tertiary_exec_control(vmx);
>> + tertiary_exec_controls_set(vmx, vmx->tertiary_exec_control);
> IMO, the existing vmx->secondary_exec_control is an abomination that should not
> exist. Looking at the code, it's actually not hard to get rid, there's just one
> annoying use in prepare_vmcs02_early() that requires a bit of extra work to get
> rid of.
>
> Anyways, for tertiary controls, I'd prefer to avoid the same mess and instead
> follow vmx_exec_control(), both in functionality and in name:
>
> static u64 vmx_tertiary_exec_control(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
> {
> return vmcs_config.cpu_based_3rd_exec_ctrl;
> }
>
> and:
>
> if (cpu_has_tertiary_exec_ctrls())
> tertiary_exec_controls_set(vmx, vmx_tertiary_exec_control(vmx));
>
> and then the next patch becomes:
>
> static u64 vmx_tertiary_exec_control(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx)
> {
> u64 exec_control = vmcs_config.cpu_based_3rd_exec_ctrl;
>
> if (!kvm_vcpu_apicv_active(vcpu))
> exec_control &= ~TERTIARY_EXEC_IPI_VIRT;
>
> return exec_control;
> }
>
>
> And I'll work on a patch to purge vmx->secondary_exec_control.
Ok, it looks much concise. I will change as you suggest. Thanks.
>> + }
>> +
>> if (kvm_vcpu_apicv_active(&vmx->vcpu)) {
>> vmcs_write64(EOI_EXIT_BITMAP0, 0);
>> vmcs_write64(EOI_EXIT_BITMAP1, 0);
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
>> index 945c6639ce24..c356ceebe84c 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
>> @@ -266,6 +266,7 @@ struct vcpu_vmx {
>> u32 msr_ia32_umwait_control;
>>
>> u32 secondary_exec_control;
>> + u64 tertiary_exec_control;
>>
>> /*
>> * loaded_vmcs points to the VMCS currently used in this vcpu. For a
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists