[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZpEwT59eveCC79uN@google.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 06:31:59 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hou Wenlong <houwenlong.hwl@...group.com>,
Kechen Lu <kechenl@...dia.com>, Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>, Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>,
Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>, Robert Hoo <robert.hoo.linux@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/49] KVM: x86: Reject disabling of MWAIT/HLT
interception when not allowed
On Fri, Jul 12, 2024, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> On 5/18/2024 1:38 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > @@ -6565,33 +6571,29 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm,
> > break;
> > case KVM_CAP_X86_DISABLE_EXITS:
> > r = -EINVAL;
> > - if (cap->args[0] & ~KVM_X86_DISABLE_VALID_EXITS)
> > + if (cap->args[0] & ~kvm_get_allowed_disable_exits())
>
> sigh.
>
> KVM_X86_DISABLE_VALID_EXITS has no user now. But we cannot remove it since
> it's in uapi header, right?
We can, actually. Forcing userspace to make changes when userspace updates their
copy of the headers is ok (building directly against kernel headers is discouraged).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists