From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64740C00140 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 20:41:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235003AbiHBUlz (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2022 16:41:55 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43042 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234628AbiHBUlx (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2022 16:41:53 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62c.google.com (mail-pl1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46BF3419B8 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 13:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id m2so7744900pls.4 for ; Tue, 02 Aug 2022 13:41:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc; bh=7xjDDxxQfmpPBRCybHCm4DRLSoGvc3iJ8H4E+bKdArs=; b=S5F3BoeiU3pIgieJm7tPYwmfI2c3ectAi8d42PqNel0HnNhYhErUwT5BAmb/fzEKEi FvFZWHs36QcJZslB9nqGhYh/agHCeuzBL4n1ZxZYN161kRJIfPMd+m9h37HIsEl7DK1b g1HpD03yDCm63xdDUeLIce0iP528JROijLMhW+elmXScE/8ITw/SdW9Motm5keeSsczR lXPMo80XBAm2wCdaL5QBO/g3hekqgcwbPaGSgpjdmzj4+PaBr8w8DlFYVIbM4mz/qGl8 ZnIgOshFpTLEg7qhMorTG7g8veGHLEDt9Jvj+aJOWLYcX0BKLOTsZQEl9NTyo2bGiv59 OyHw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=7xjDDxxQfmpPBRCybHCm4DRLSoGvc3iJ8H4E+bKdArs=; b=i1H4jRYcGvgCMug2hF9LnYl1vWZtuGGto25/YpozecxHRdbSic3kir2vYsRy5G/X7P YacUeHuV+ZR4NCOshRq+ygD9Xhqj460id05kEUFZ+uy9S7+i4lKZECaiKe4ksW9/OXna J7vGpIR3tYO74hfzCSfg966TjHCjA9iw+8e8fb8f9Ih8EaOItfQ9Dx73fBS203rCb6ha 9vgdTeERL8i0jcsU7BS8QcwSGFyDFF0vJPjDpplit7lCzRk3VZUyNCPBEXxJvFDzf+Sd PNpmPQIZ8XF4aQSkOypFcwR+UDqT9TfvFQloC5pLsuX8qflmy0AiYpXjD2LrhD8k3hDc SuVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo2dbx64Q9Ey28n0axZyC9UM+JDRPbj0Pko4LysQ8lSkVgxNPAnw 9Tv55+LyZmQ3xnS3qGy/TyNqig== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR7Esp9V/xSixJU0GIppBkpwBozYA62W2tbkie+LTzK5g/cnP+vn6prpyO1dfif5XbSGomujjg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:328e:b0:16e:fa5f:37ae with SMTP id jh14-20020a170903328e00b0016efa5f37aemr7981059plb.148.1659472911326; Tue, 02 Aug 2022 13:41:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (7.104.168.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.168.104.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b9-20020a63cf49000000b0040cb1f55391sm7349850pgj.2.2022.08.02.13.41.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 02 Aug 2022 13:41:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2022 20:41:47 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Yu Zhang Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] X86: Set up EPT before running vmx_pf_exception_test Message-ID: References: <20220715113334.52491-1-yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220715113334.52491-1-yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 15, 2022, Yu Zhang wrote: > Although currently vmx_pf_exception_test can succeed, its > success is actually because we are using identical mappings > in the page tables and EB.PF is not set by L1. In practice, > the #PFs shall be expected by L1, if it is using shadowing > for L2. I'm a bit lost. Is there an actual failure somewhere? AFAICT, this passes when run as L1 or L2, with or without EPT enabled. > So just set up the EPT, and clear the EB.PT, then L1 has the > right to claim a failure if a #PF is encountered. > > Signed-off-by: Yu Zhang > --- > x86/vmx_tests.c | 11 +++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/x86/vmx_tests.c b/x86/vmx_tests.c > index 4d581e7..cc90611 100644 > --- a/x86/vmx_tests.c > +++ b/x86/vmx_tests.c > @@ -10639,6 +10639,17 @@ static void __vmx_pf_exception_test(invalidate_tlb_t inv_fn, void *data) > > static void vmx_pf_exception_test(void) > { > + u32 eb; > + > + if (setup_ept(false)) { > + printf("EPT not supported.\n"); > + return; > + } > + > + eb = vmcs_read(EXC_BITMAP); > + eb &= ~(1 << PF_VECTOR); > + vmcs_write(EXC_BITMAP, eb); > + > __vmx_pf_exception_test(NULL, NULL); > } > > -- > 2.25.1 >