public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tao Su <tao1.su@linux.intel.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,  eddie.dong@intel.com,
	chao.gao@intel.com, xiaoyao.li@intel.com,
	 yuan.yao@linux.intel.com, yi1.lai@intel.com,
	xudong.hao@intel.com,  chao.p.peng@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: KVM: Limit guest physical bits when 5-level EPT is unsupported
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 15:24:29 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZZSbLUGNNBDjDRMB@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZYP0/nK/WJgzO1yP@yilunxu-OptiPlex-7050>

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023, Xu Yilun wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 08:28:06AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > > index c57e181bba21..72634d6b61b2 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> > > @@ -5177,6 +5177,13 @@ void __kvm_mmu_refresh_passthrough_bits(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > >  	reset_guest_paging_metadata(vcpu, mmu);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +/* guest-physical-address bits limited by TDP */
> > > +unsigned int kvm_mmu_tdp_maxphyaddr(void)
> > > +{
> > > +	return max_tdp_level == 5 ? 57 : 48;
> > 
> > Using "57" is kinda sorta wrong, e.g. the SDM says:
> > 
> >   Bits 56:52 of each guest-physical address are necessarily zero because
> >   guest-physical addresses are architecturally limited to 52 bits.
> > 
> > Rather than split hairs over something that doesn't matter, I think it makes sense
> > for the CPUID code to consume max_tdp_level directly (I forgot that max_tdp_level
> > is still accurate when tdp_root_level is non-zero).
> 
> It is still accurate for now. Only AMD SVM sets tdp_root_level the same as
> max_tdp_level:
> 
> 	kvm_configure_mmu(npt_enabled, get_npt_level(),
> 			  get_npt_level(), PG_LEVEL_1G);
> 
> But I wanna doulbe confirm if directly using max_tdp_level is fully
> considered.  In your last proposal, it is:
> 
>   u8 kvm_mmu_get_max_tdp_level(void)
>   {
> 	return tdp_root_level ? tdp_root_level : max_tdp_level;
>   }
> 
> and I think it makes more sense, because EPT setup follows the same
> rule.  If any future architechture sets tdp_root_level smaller than
> max_tdp_level, the issue will happen again.

Setting tdp_root_level != max_tdp_level would be a blatant bug.  max_tdp_level
really means "max possible TDP level KVM can use".  If an exact TDP level is being
forced by tdp_root_level, then by definition it's also the max TDP level, because
it's the _only_ TDP level KVM supports.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-01-02 23:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-12-18 14:05 [PATCH 0/2] x86: KVM: Limit guest physical bits when 5-level EPT is unsupported Tao Su
2023-12-18 14:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Tao Su
2023-12-18 15:13   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-12-19  2:51     ` Chao Gao
2023-12-19  3:40       ` Jim Mattson
2023-12-19  8:09         ` Chao Gao
2023-12-19 15:26           ` Sean Christopherson
2023-12-20  7:16             ` Xiaoyao Li
2023-12-20 15:37               ` Sean Christopherson
2023-12-20 11:59             ` Tao Su
2023-12-20 13:39             ` Jim Mattson
2023-12-19  8:31     ` Tao Su
2023-12-20 16:28   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-12-21  7:45     ` Tao Su
2023-12-21  8:19     ` Xu Yilun
2024-01-02 23:24       ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-01-03  0:34         ` Jim Mattson
2024-01-03 18:04           ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-04  2:45             ` Chao Gao
2024-01-04  3:40               ` Jim Mattson
2024-01-04  4:34                 ` Jim Mattson
2024-01-04 11:56                   ` Tao Su
2024-01-04 14:03                     ` Jim Mattson
2024-01-04 15:07                 ` Chao Gao
2024-01-04 17:02                   ` Jim Mattson
2024-01-05 20:26                     ` Sean Christopherson
2024-01-08 13:45                       ` Tao Su
2024-01-08 15:29                         ` Sean Christopherson
2023-12-18 14:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: KVM: Emulate instruction when GPA can't be translated by EPT Tao Su
2023-12-18 15:23   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-12-19  3:10     ` Chao Gao
2023-12-20 13:42   ` Jim Mattson
2024-01-08 13:48     ` Tao Su
2024-01-08 15:19       ` Sean Christopherson

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=ZZSbLUGNNBDjDRMB@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=chao.gao@intel.com \
    --cc=chao.p.peng@intel.com \
    --cc=eddie.dong@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=tao1.su@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
    --cc=xudong.hao@intel.com \
    --cc=yi1.lai@intel.com \
    --cc=yilun.xu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=yuan.yao@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