Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <d34c1d3c-324e-4645-9d48-09c94212aa5e@default>
Date:   Tue, 27 Mar 2018 01:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com>
To:     <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     <kernellwp@gmail.com>, <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: VMX: Add Force Emulation Prefix for "emulate the
 next instruction"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


----- pbonzini@redhat.com wrote:

> On 27/03/2018 09:52, Liran Alon wrote:
> > In addition, I think this module parameter should be in kvm module
> > (not kvm_intel) and you should add similar logic to kvm_amd module
> (SVM)
>=20
> If you can move handle_ud to x86.c, then it makes sense to have the
> module parameter in the kvm module.  I haven't checked.

I don't see a reason why you couldn't do that.

>=20
> Otherwise you would have to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL the variable; in the

This is what I did for enable_vmware_backdoor module parameter.
I think this is what should be done in this case as-well.

> end
> it's just a debugging tool, so it'd be simpler to just add it
> separately
> to kvm_intel and kvm_amd.

I agree it's just a debugging tool. But no reason for it to be used differe=
ntly
when running tests on Intel CPU vs. AMD CPU.
I think the effort to fix this is low.

>=20
> Paolo