>>> On 2/3/2016 at 04:18 PM, Nadav Amit <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oops.
>
> Anyhow, I see my patch has done a similar change in init_vmcb() , so you may
> want to revert it as well.
>
> Nadav
>
> Bruce Rogers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Commit d28bc9dd25ce reversed the order of two lines which initialize cr0,
>> allowing the current (old) cr0 value to mess up vcpu initialization.
>> This was observed in the checks for cr0 X86_CR0_WP bit in the context of
>> kvm_mmu_reset_context(). Besides, setting vcpu->arch.cr0 after vmx_set_cr0()
>> is completely redundant. Change the order back to ensure proper vcpu
>> intiialization.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bruce Rogers <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> index e2951b6..21507b4 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> @@ -4993,8 +4993,8 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool
> init_event)
>> vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vmx->vpid);
>>
>> cr0 = X86_CR0_NW | X86_CR0_CD | X86_CR0_ET;
>> - vmx_set_cr0(vcpu, cr0); /* enter rmode */
>> vmx->vcpu.arch.cr0 = cr0;
>> + vmx_set_cr0(vcpu, cr0); /* enter rmode */
>> vmx_set_cr4(vcpu, 0);
>> vmx_set_efer(vcpu, 0);
>> vmx_fpu_activate(vcpu);
>> --
>> 1.9.0
>
I had not pursued this as the initial problem I was chasing ended up including some
undefined behavior.
Since, I've run into another failure which this patch addresses (ovmf based booting with
vcpu count >1 on older hardware), so I'll resend this one patch with updated info.
Also, it seems to me that the init_vmcb() svm issue Nadav mentioned is no longer an
issue in the current master branch so I won't be addressing that.
Bruce