linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] KVM: x86: Generate set of VMX feature MSRs using first/last definitions

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:40:33 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] KVM: x86: Generate set of VMX feature MSRs using
 first/last definitions

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 8/5/22 19:29, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > +static void kvm_proble_feature_msr(u32 msr_index)
> > +{
> > +	struct kvm_msr_entry msr = {
> > +		.index = msr_index,
> > +	};
> > +
> > +	if (kvm_get_msr_feature(&msr))
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	msr_based_features[num_msr_based_features++] = msr_index;
> > +}
> > +
> >   static void kvm_init_msr_list(void)
> >   {
> >   	u32 dummy[2];
> > @@ -6954,15 +6949,11 @@ static void kvm_init_msr_list(void)
> >   		emulated_msrs[num_emulated_msrs++] = emulated_msrs_all[i];
> >   	}
> > -	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(msr_based_features_all); i++) {
> > -		struct kvm_msr_entry msr;
> > +	for (i = KVM_FIRST_EMULATED_VMX_MSR; i <= KVM_LAST_EMULATED_VMX_MSR; i++)
> > +		kvm_proble_feature_msr(i);
> > -		msr.index = msr_based_features_all[i];
> > -		if (kvm_get_msr_feature(&msr))
> > -			continue;
> > -
> > -		msr_based_features[num_msr_based_features++] = msr_based_features_all[i];
> > -	}
> > +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(msr_based_features_all_except_vmx); i++)
> > +		kvm_proble_feature_msr(msr_based_features_all_except_vmx[i]);
> 
> I'd rather move all the code to a new function kvm_init_feature_msr_list()
> instead, and call it from kvm_arch_hardware_setup().

Would it make sense to also split out kvm_init_emulated_msr_list()?  Hmm, and
rename this to kvm_init_virtualized_msr_list()?  I can't tell if that would be
helpful or confusing.