[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALMp9eTmcTjJ+aAN3EPANqx3Qo3Psiafz1iuT3fKgpM4Qe0OaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2022 11:09:28 -0700
From: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Babu Moger <babu.moger@....com>,
"Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Wyes Karny <wyes.karny@....com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] KVM: svm: Disallow EFER.LMSLE on hardware that
doesn't support it
On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 12:04 PM Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:33:29PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > ...
> > Either way, KVM appears to be carrying a half-baked "fix" for a buggy guest that's
> > long since gone. So like we did in commit 8805875aa473 ("Revert "KVM: nVMX: Do not
> > expose MPX VMX controls when guest MPX disabled""), I think we should just revert
> > the "fix".
>
> If, as message 0/5 says, setting this bit so that SLE11 Xen 4.0 boots as
> a nested hypervisor is the use case, then sure, unconditional NO_LSMLE
> and we all should go on with our lives.
Fantastic! That's what I'll do in V2.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists