Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933217AbdGKUWf (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:22:35 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22234 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754513AbdGKUWe (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:22:34 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 20C3681226 Authentication-Results: ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rkrcmar@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 20C3681226 Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 22:22:27 +0200 From: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= To: Bandan Das Cc: Jim Mattson , David Hildenbrand , kvm list , Paolo Bonzini , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: nVMX: Emulate EPTP switching for the L1 hypervisor Message-ID: <20170711202227.GC3442@potion> References: <20170710204936.4001-1-bsd@redhat.com> <20170710204936.4001-4-bsd@redhat.com> <2d50ebc4-9328-ce08-b55b-6a331ee13cc3@redhat.com> <20170711191334.GB3442@potion> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.25]); Tue, 11 Jul 2017 20:22:34 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1259 Lines: 30 2017-07-11 15:38-0400, Bandan Das: > Radim Krčmář writes: > > > 2017-07-11 14:35-0400, Bandan Das: > >> Jim Mattson writes: > >> ... > >> >>> I can find the definition for an vmexit in case of index >= > >> >>> VMFUNC_EPTP_ENTRIES, but not for !vmcs12->eptp_list_address in the SDM. > >> >>> > >> >>> Can you give me a hint? > >> >> > >> >> I don't think there is. Since, we are basically emulating eptp switching > >> >> for L2, this is a good check to have. > >> > > >> > There is nothing wrong with a hypervisor using physical page 0 for > >> > whatever purpose it likes, including an EPTP list. > >> > >> Right, but of all the things, a l1 hypervisor wanting page 0 for a eptp list > >> address most likely means it forgot to initialize it. Whatever damage it does will > >> still end up with vmfunc vmexit anyway. > > > > Most likely, but not certainly. I also don't see a to diverge from the > > spec here. > > Actually, this is a specific case where I would like to diverge from the spec. > But then again, it's L1 shooting itself in the foot and this would be a rarely > used code path, so, I am fine removing it. Thanks, we're not here to judge the guest, but to provide a bare-metal experience. :)