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;
Date:   Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:48:05 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To:     Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
        Michael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom.com>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        x86 <x86@kernel.org>, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] kvm/vmx: Emulate MSR TEST_CTL
Message-ID: <20190408174805.GJ25880@linux.intel.com>
References: <1554326526-172295-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
 <1554326526-172295-13-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1904051400230.1802@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <423f329a8e194d799c6c41470266a04a9f90bc84.camel@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <423f329a8e194d799c6c41470266a04a9f90bc84.camel@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 05:54:25PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-04-05 at 14:30 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > > @@ -1663,6 +1663,12 @@ static int vmx_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct
> > > msr_data *msr_info)
> > >  	u32 index;
> > >  
> > >  	switch (msr_info->index) {
> > > +	case MSR_TEST_CTL:
> > > +		if (!msr_info->host_initiated &&
> > > +		    !(vcpu->arch.core_capability & CORE_CAP_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT))
> > 
> > Errm? If the MSR_TEST_CTL is exposed to the guest via CPUID then the
> > rdmsr() in the guest is not supposed to fail just because
> > CORE_CAP_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT is not set.
> 
> you're right.
> 
> > vmx->msr_test_ctl holds the proper value, which is either 0 or
> > CORE_CAP_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT until more bits are supported.
> > 
> > So the chek needs to be guest_cpuid_has(X86_FEATURE_CORE_CAPABILITY).
> 
> I don't think so. There is no dependecy between
> guest_cpuid_has(X86_FEATURE_CORE_CAPABILITY) and MSR_TEST_CTL.
> guest_cpuid_has(X86_FEATURE_CORE_CAPABILITY) only indicates that guest has MSR
> CORE_CAPABILITY.
> 
> Due to the fact that MSR_TEST_CTL is emulated with vmx->msr_test_ctl. I think it
> 's ok to always let userspace or guest to read MSR_TEST_CTL, it just returns the
> emulated value. Like you said, " vmx->msr_test_ctl holds the proper value, which
> is either 0 or CORE_CAP_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT until more bits are supported."

Assuming the next version implements "vmx->msr_test_ctl_mask", KVM should
inject #GP if the guest attempts RDMSR(MSR_TEST_CTL) and the mask is zero.
It stands to reason that a kernel can only reasonably assume the MSR exists
if the (virtual) CPU supports at least one feature enabled via MSR_TEST_CTL.