From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: KVM Nested L2 guest startup problems Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 13:40:01 +0200 Message-ID: <536A1B91.2070103@redhat.com> References: <53636B1D.8030405@redhat.com> <5363BF42.9020505@redhat.com> <5369F5B0.7050307@redhat.com> <536A1AEA.9020309@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Hu Yaohui , Bandan Das , kvm , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Muli Ben-Yehuda To: Abel Gordon Return-path: In-Reply-To: <536A1AEA.9020309@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Il 07/05/2014 13:37, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto: > Il 07/05/2014 13:16, Abel Gordon ha scritto: >>> > PLE should be left enabled, I think. >> Well... the PLE settings L0 uses to run L1 (vmcs01) may be different >> than the PLE settings L1 configured to run L2 (vmcs12). >> For example, L0 can use a ple_gap to run L1 that is bigger than the >> ple_gap L1 configured to run L2. Or L0 can use a ple_window to run L1 >> that is smaller than the ple_window L1 configured to run L2. > > That's correct. We should leave PLE enabled while running L2, but hide > the feature altogether from L1. ... which we already do. The only secondary execution controls we allow are APIC page, unrestricted guest, WBINVD exits, and of course EPT. Paolo