Re: [PATCH uq/master 1/2] x86: fix migration from pre-version 12

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

Il 09/09/2013 13:28, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
>> On an XSAVE host, when the guest FPU state is loaded KVM will do an
>> XRSTOR.  The XRSTOR will restore the FPU state to default values.
>>
>> On a non-XSAVE host, when the guest FPU state is loaded KVM will do an
>> FXRSTR.  The FXRSTR will load the FPU state from the first 512 bytes of
>> the block that was passed to KVM_SET_XSAVE.
>>
>> This is not a problem because userspace will usually pass to
>> KVM_SET_XSAVE only something that it got from KVM_GET_XSAVE, and
>> KVM_GET_XSAVE will never set XSTATE_BV=0.  However, KVM_SET_XSAVE is
>> supposed to emulate XSAVE/XRSTOR if it is not available, and it is
>> failing to emulate this detail.
>>
> You are trying to be bug to bug compatible :) XSTATE_BV can be zero only
> if FPU state is reset one, otherwise the guest will not survive.

Yes.

> KVM_SET_XSAVE
> is not suppose to emulate XSAVE/XRSTOR, it is not emulator function. It
> is better to outlaw zero value for XSTATE_BV at all, but we cannot do it
> because current QEMU uses it.

I agree it'd be better to forbid it.  If the mismatch in semantics does
not bother you, I won't fix it.  It slightly bothers me. :)

>>>>>> Yes.  QEMU unmarshals information from the XSAVE region and back, so it
>>>>>> cannot support MPX or AVX-512 yet (even if KVM were).  Separate bug, though.
>>>>>>
>>>>> IMO this is the main issue here, not separate bug. If we gonna let guest
>>>>> use CPU state QEMU does not support we gonna have a bad time.
>>>>
>>>> We cannot force the guest not to use a feature; all we can do is hide
>>>
>>> Of course we can't, this is correct for other features too, but this is
>>> guest's problem.
>>
>> Ok, then we agree that QEMU doesn't have a problem?  The XSAVE data will
> 
> Which problem exactly. The problems I see is that 1. We do not support
> MPX and AVX-512 (but this is probably not the problem you meant :)) 2. 0D
> data is not consistent with features. Guest may not expect it and do stupid
> things.

It is not a problem to unmarshal information out of KVM_GET_XSAVE data
(and back).  If the guest does stupid things, it's a bug in an
ill-behaving guest.

On the other hand, I agree that passthrough of host 0xD data is bad and
will fix it.

Paolo

>> always be "fresh" as long as the guest obeys CPUID bits it receives, and
>> the CPUID bits that QEMU passes will never enable XSAVE data that QEMU
>> does not support.
>>
> 
> --
> 			Gleb.
>