[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZN1HT61WM0Pmxqmr@google.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 15:01:51 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
pbonzini@...hat.com, chao.gao@...el.com, kai.huang@...el.com,
David.Laight@...lab.com, robert.hu@...ux.intel.com,
guang.zeng@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 7/9] KVM: VMX: Implement and wire get_untagged_addr()
for LAM
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023, Binbin Wu wrote:
> + return (sign_extend64(gva, lam_bit) & ~BIT_ULL(63)) | (gva & BIT_ULL(63));
Almost forgot. Please add a comment explaning how LAM untags the address,
specifically the whole bit 63 preservation. The logic is actually straightforward,
but the above looks way more complex than it actually is. This?
/*
* Untag the address by sign-extending the LAM bit, but NOT to bit 63.
* Bit 63 is retained from the raw virtual address so that untagging
* doesn't change a user access to a supervisor access, and vice versa.
*/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists