[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87v8t3igv8.fsf@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 14:12:11 +0200
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Anirudh Rayabharam <anrayabh@...ux.microsoft.com>
Cc: mail@...rudhrb.com, kumarpraveen@...ux.microsoft.com,
wei.liu@...nel.org, robert.bradford@...el.com, liuwe@...rosoft.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.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>,
Ilias Stamatis <ilstam@...zon.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: Don't expose TSC scaling to L1 when on Hyper-V
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> writes:
> On 6/13/22 18:16, Anirudh Rayabharam wrote:
>> + if (!kvm_has_tsc_control)
>> + msrs->secondary_ctls_high &= ~SECONDARY_EXEC_TSC_SCALING;
>> +
>> msrs->secondary_ctls_low = 0;
>> msrs->secondary_ctls_high &=
>> SECONDARY_EXEC_DESC |
>> @@ -6667,8 +6670,7 @@ void nested_vmx_setup_ctls_msrs(struct nested_vmx_msrs *msrs, u32 ept_caps)
>> SECONDARY_EXEC_RDRAND_EXITING |
>> SECONDARY_EXEC_ENABLE_INVPCID |
>> SECONDARY_EXEC_RDSEED_EXITING |
>> - SECONDARY_EXEC_XSAVES |
>> - SECONDARY_EXEC_TSC_SCALING;
>> + SECONDARY_EXEC_XSAVES;
>>
>> /*
>
> This is wrong because it _always_ disables SECONDARY_EXEC_TSC_SCALING,
> even if kvm_has_tsc_control == true.
>
> That said, I think a better implementation of this patch is to just add
> a version of evmcs_sanitize_exec_ctrls that takes a struct
> nested_vmx_msrs *, and call it at the end of nested_vmx_setup_ctl_msrs like
>
> evmcs_sanitize_nested_vmx_vsrs(msrs);
>
> Even better (but I cannot "mentally test it" offhand) would be just
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> index e802f71a9e8d..b3425ce835c5 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> @@ -1862,7 +1862,7 @@ int vmx_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> * sanity checking and refuse to boot. Filter all unsupported
> * features out.
> */
> - if (!msr_info->host_initiated &&
> + if (static_branch_unlikely(&enable_evmcs) ||
> vmx->nested.enlightened_vmcs_enabled)
> nested_evmcs_filter_control_msr(msr_info->index,
> &msr_info->data);
>
> I cannot quite understand the host_initiated check, so I'll defer to
> Vitaly on why it is needed. Most likely, removing it would cause some
> warnings in QEMU with e.g. "-cpu Haswell,+vmx"; but I think it's a
> userspace bug and we should remove that part of the condition.
I forgot the details, of course, but 31de3d2500e4 says:
```
With fine grained VMX feature enablement QEMU>=4.2 tries to do KVM_SET_MSRS
with default (matching CPU model) values and in case eVMCS is also enabled,
fails.
```
so it certainly was a workaround for QEMU.
--
Vitaly
Powered by blists - more mailing lists