From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/5] KVM/VMX: Add identical ept table pointer check
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:59:06 +0200
Message-ID: <8326ebac-ea35-3e26-ae6a-e57b73e07783@redhat.com>
References: <20180709090218.15342-1-Tianyu.Lan@microsoft.com>
 <20180709090218.15342-4-Tianyu.Lan@microsoft.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "rkrcmar@redhat.com" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        "devel@linuxdriverproject.org" <devel@linuxdriverproject.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Michael Kelley (EOSG)" <Michael.H.Kelley@microsoft.com>,
        "vkuznets@redhat.com" <vkuznets@redhat.com>
To: Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@microsoft.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20180709090218.15342-4-Tianyu.Lan@microsoft.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 09/07/2018 11:02, Tianyu Lan wrote:
> +static void check_ept_pointer(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 eptp)
> +{
> +	struct kvm *kvm = vcpu->kvm;
> +	u64 tmp_eptp = INVALID_PAGE;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	if (!kvm_x86_ops->tlb_remote_flush)
> +		return;
> +
> +	spin_lock(&to_kvm_vmx(kvm)->ept_pointer_lock);
> +	to_vmx(vcpu)->ept_pointer = eptp;
> +
> +	kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
> +		if (!VALID_PAGE(tmp_eptp)) {
> +			tmp_eptp = to_vmx(vcpu)->ept_pointer;
> +		} else if (tmp_eptp != to_vmx(vcpu)->ept_pointer) {
> +			to_kvm_vmx(kvm)->ept_pointers_match = false;
> +			spin_unlock(&to_kvm_vmx(kvm)->ept_pointer_lock);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	to_kvm_vmx(kvm)->ept_pointers_match = true;
> +	spin_unlock(&to_kvm_vmx(kvm)->ept_pointer_lock);
> +}
> +

Is there any reason to do the check here, rather than the first time the
TLB flush is invoked?  You could:

- have a tristate (true, false, check) value for ept_pointers_match

- reset it to "check" in vmx_set_cr3

- set it to either true or false in tlb_remote_flush if it is check, and
do the hypercall if it is true.

Paolo