All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Manuel Andreas <manuel.andreas@tum.de>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	pbonzini@redhat.com,  Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/hyper-v: Don't WARN on VM-Enter if eVMCS sees VMFUNC[63:32] != 0
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 05:05:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <atiqfqmzRhrlLGHc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17ae73e9-c460-4ffc-9fc0-5fe2e8e1a08a@tum.de>

On Wed, Oct 21, 2026, Manuel Andreas wrote:
> On 10/21/26 00:56, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > I think the WARN is correct, this code is broken.  Unless I'm missing some eVMCS
> > magic/quirk, this, and the secondary controls check, should be conditioned on the
> > field actually being used.
> > 
> > This, over two patches?
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/hyperv.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/hyperv.c
> > index fa41d036acd4..a1daf8f2ec5a 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/hyperv.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/hyperv.c
> > @@ -169,7 +169,8 @@ int nested_evmcs_check_controls(struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
> >  					       vmcs12->cpu_based_vm_exec_control)))
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> > -	if (CC(!nested_evmcs_is_valid_controls(EVMCS_2NDEXEC,
> > +	if (nested_cpu_has(vmcs12, CPU_BASED_ACTIVATE_SECONDARY_CONTROLS) &&
> > +	    CC(!nested_evmcs_is_valid_controls(EVMCS_2NDEXEC,
> >  					       vmcs12->secondary_vm_exec_control)))
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> > @@ -186,11 +187,10 @@ int nested_evmcs_check_controls(struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
> >  	 * controls in bits 63:32, i.e. dropping those bits on the consistency
> >  	 * check is intentional.
> >  	 */
> > -	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(vmcs12->vm_function_control >> 32))
> > -		return -EINVAL;
> > -
> > -	if (CC(!nested_evmcs_is_valid_controls(EVMCS_VMFUNC,
> > -					       vmcs12->vm_function_control)))
> > +	if (nested_cpu_has_vmfunc(vmcs12) &&
> > +	    (WARN_ON_ONCE(vmcs12->vm_function_control >> 32) ||
> > +	     CC(!nested_evmcs_is_valid_controls(EVMCS_VMFUNC,
> > +						vmcs12->vm_function_control))))
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> >  	return 0;
> > 
> > 
> Looks sane to me. However, I still don't see a reason for this being a
> WARN at all, what exactly is the intended signal here?

That normal, non-eVMCS VMX added support for a VMFUNC operation that lives in
bits 63:32 and thus nested_evmcs_is_valid_controls() needs to be updated to play
nice with 64-bit values.

      reply	other threads:[~2026-10-21 12:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-20 19:34 [PATCH] x86/hyper-v: Don't WARN on VM-Enter if eVMCS sees VMFUNC[63:32] != 0 Manuel Andreas
2026-10-20 19:36 ` Manuel Andreas
2026-10-20 22:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-10-21 11:42   ` Manuel Andreas
2026-10-21 12:05     ` Sean Christopherson [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=atiqfqmzRhrlLGHc@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=manuel.andreas@tum.de \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.