From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Hildenbrand Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] kvm: vmx: Raise #UD on unsupported RDSEED Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2017 13:11:30 +0200 Message-ID: <16296b5e-d051-e2af-32d5-1d07a78483d3@redhat.com> References: <20170821163858.64280-1-jmattson@google.com> <20170821192640.30817-1-jmattson@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jim Mattson , kvm@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57010 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932350AbdHVLLb (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Aug 2017 07:11:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170821192640.30817-1-jmattson@google.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 21.08.2017 21:26, Jim Mattson wrote: > A guest may not be configured to support RDSEED, even when the host > does. If the guest does not support RDSEED, intercept the instruction > and synthesize #UD. Also clear the "allowed-1" bit for RDSEED exiting > in the IA32_VMX_PROCBASED_CTLS2 MSR. > > Signed-off-by: Jim Mattson I'd really vote to update SECONDARY_EXEC_RDSEED -> SECONDARY_EXEC_RDSEED_EXITING SECONDARY_EXEC_RDRAND -> SECONDARY_EXEC_RDRAND_EXITING Otherwise this looks like it would enable RDSEED interpretation. And this way it matches the SDM definition. -- Thanks, David