From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] KVM: enable Intel SMAP for KVM Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:16:28 -0400 Message-ID: <534885DC.6040603@redhat.com> References: <1396345596-25682-1-git-send-email-feng.wu@intel.com> <533D904E.30801@redhat.com> <533E5EE3.4030708@redhat.com> <53445E30.6010809@redhat.com> <20140410200149.GA26092@amt.cnet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Wu, Feng" , "gleb@redhat.com" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" To: Marcelo Tosatti Return-path: Received: from mail-yh0-f53.google.com ([209.85.213.53]:38038 "EHLO mail-yh0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751520AbaDLAQq (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:16:46 -0400 Received: by mail-yh0-f53.google.com with SMTP id i57so4517833yha.26 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:16:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140410200149.GA26092@amt.cnet> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Il 10/04/2014 16:01, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto: > On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 04:38:08PM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Il 07/04/2014 21:06, Wu, Feng ha scritto: >>>>> Even though the tests do not cover the CPL=3/implicit access case, the >>>>> logic to compute PFERR_RSVD_MASK dynamically is already covered by AC=1. >>>>> So I'm quite happy with the coverage. Series is >>>>> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini ] >>> Thanks very much for your review on this. >>> BTW: Since 3.15 merge window is still open, I am wondering whether there is >>> any possibility to make SMAP into 3.15 with another pull request. >>> >> >> This is up to Marcelo who is currently managing the KVM tree. >> >> Paolo > > The merge window is for patches which have been tested in queue/next > for sometime. This patch has received no testing other than the > developer testing. This is not going to change unfortunately since this is not shipping in any real silicon. The only hope could be to use QEMU's SVM and SMAP emulation. > Lack of implicit supervisor mode by instructions such as "Examples of > such implicit..." in section 9.3.2, in KVM's emulator, makes the feature > incomplete, does it not ? Implicit supervisor mode is handled by KVM emulator using read/write_std. These accesses do not set PFERR_USER_MASK, and should work fine with SMAP. Am I misunderstanding? Paolo > (would have to signal those accesses as supervisor ones).