[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Ya/GL0zyobfM1rUF@google.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 20:38:07 +0000
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/15] KVM: VMX: Add document to state that write to uret
msr should always be intercepted
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/18/21 12:08, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>
> >
> > And adds a corresponding sanity check code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 10 +++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > index e8a41fdc3c4d..cd081219b668 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> > @@ -3703,13 +3703,21 @@ void vmx_disable_intercept_for_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr, int type)
> > if (!cpu_has_vmx_msr_bitmap())
> > return;
> > + /*
> > + * Write to uret msr should always be intercepted due to the mechanism
> > + * must know the current value. Santity check to avoid any inadvertent
> > + * mistake in coding.
> > + */
> > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(vmx_find_uret_msr(vmx, msr) && (type & MSR_TYPE_W)))
> > + return;
> > +
>
> I'm not sure about this one, it's relatively expensive to call
> vmx_find_uret_msr.
>
> User-return MSRs and disable-intercept MSRs are almost the opposite: uret is
> for MSRs that the host (not even the processor) never uses,
> disable-intercept is for MSRs that the guest reads/writes often. As such it
> seems almost impossible that they overlap.
And they aren't fundamentally mutually exclusive, e.g. KVM could pass-through an
MSR and then do RDMSR in vmx_prepare_switch_to_host() to refresh the uret data
with the current (guest) value. It'd be silly, but it would work.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists