From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@google.com>,
Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] KVM: nVMX: Don't muck with allowed sec exec controls on CPUID changes
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2022 18:30:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <70872206-7a75-0a19-3df5-a97207e710fa@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221213062306.667649-4-seanjc@google.com>
On 12/13/22 07:23, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Don't modify the set of allowed secondary execution controls, i.e. the
> virtual MSR_IA32_VMX_PROCBASED_CTLS2, in response to guest CPUID changes.
> To avoid breaking old userspace that never sets the VMX MSRs, i.e. relies
> on KVM to provide a consistent vCPU model, keep the existing behavior if
> userspace has never written MSR_IA32_VMX_PROCBASED_CTLS2.
>
> KVM should not modify the VMX capabilities presented to L1 based on CPUID
> as doing so may discard explicit settings provided by userspace. E.g. if
> userspace does KVM_SET_MSRS => KVM_SET_CPUID and disables a feature in
> the VMX MSRs but not CPUID (to prevent exposing the feature to L2), then
> stuffing the VMX MSRs during KVM_SET_CPUID will expose the feature to L2
> against userspace's wishes.
The commit message doesn't explain *why* KVM_SET_CPUID would be done
before KVM_SET_MSRS. The presence of certain MSRs or bits within is
signaled by CPUID bits, and even though KVM is more lenient on
host-initiated MSR writes it still verifies in general that the bits are
valid.
For now I applied patch 1 and (with a reworded comment) patch 2. I'm
not opposed to the rest, but I would like to better understand the
reason for them. (If it has been reported to the mailing list, please
add a "Link" trailer too).
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-23 17:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-13 6:23 [PATCH v2 0/4] KVM: nVMX: Fix 2nd exec controls override goofs Sean Christopherson
2022-12-13 6:23 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] KVM: nVMX: Properly expose ENABLE_USR_WAIT_PAUSE control to L1 Sean Christopherson
2022-12-13 10:26 ` Yu Zhang
2022-12-13 18:08 ` Jim Mattson
2022-12-13 6:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] KVM: nVMX: Don't stuff secondary execution control if it's not supported Sean Christopherson
2022-12-13 6:23 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] KVM: nVMX: Don't muck with allowed sec exec controls on CPUID changes Sean Christopherson
2022-12-23 17:30 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2023-01-04 14:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-01-04 14:42 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-12-13 6:23 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] KVM: selftests: Test KVM's handling of VMX's sec exec MSR on KVM_SET_CPUID Sean Christopherson
2022-12-14 3:00 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] KVM: nVMX: Fix 2nd exec controls override goofs Yu Zhang
2022-12-15 0:18 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-12-15 11:24 ` Yu Zhang
2022-12-15 18:33 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-12-16 9:59 ` Yu Zhang
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=70872206-7a75-0a19-3df5-a97207e710fa@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=aaronlewis@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox