Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM/x86: pmu: Fix #GP condition check for RDPMC emulation
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     kvm@vger.kernel.org, Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20200708074409.39028-1-like.xu@linux.intel.com>
 <20200708151824.GA22737@linux.intel.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <e285ccb3-29bd-dcb8-73d1-eeee11d72198@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 17:31:14 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200708151824.GA22737@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 08/07/20 17:18, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 03:44:09PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
>> in guest protected mode, if the current privilege level
>> is not 0 and the pce flag in the cr4 register is cleared,
>> we will inject a #gp for rdpmc usage.
> 
> Wrapping at ~58 characters is a bit aggressive.  checkpatch enforces 75
> chars, something near that would be prefereable.
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
>> index b86346903f2e..d080d475c808 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
>> @@ -372,6 +372,11 @@ int kvm_pmu_rdpmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned idx, u64 *data)
>>  	if (!pmc)
>>  		return 1;
>>  
>> +	if ((kvm_x86_ops.get_cpl(vcpu) != 0) &&
>> +	    !(kvm_read_cr4(vcpu) & X86_CR4_PCE) &&
>> +	    (kvm_read_cr4(vcpu) & X86_CR0_PE))
> 
> This reads CR4 but checks CR0.PE.
> 
> And maybe put the X86_CR4_PCE check first so that it's the focus of the
> statement?

I'll squash this to fix it (I'm OOO next week and would like to get kvm/queue
sorted out these few days that I've left).

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
index d080d475c808..67741d2a0308 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c
@@ -372,9 +372,9 @@ int kvm_pmu_rdpmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned idx, u64 *data)
 	if (!pmc)
 		return 1;
 
-	if ((kvm_x86_ops.get_cpl(vcpu) != 0) &&
-	    !(kvm_read_cr4(vcpu) & X86_CR4_PCE) &&
-	    (kvm_read_cr4(vcpu) & X86_CR0_PE))
+	if (!(kvm_read_cr4(vcpu) & X86_CR4_PCE) &&
+	    (kvm_x86_ops.get_cpl(vcpu) != 0) &&
+	    (kvm_read_cr0(vcpu) & X86_CR0_PE))
 		return 1;
 
 	*data = pmc_read_counter(pmc) & mask;


The order follows the SDM.  I'm tempted to remove the CR0 check
altogether, since non-protected-mode always runs at CPL0 AFAIK, but let's
keep it close to what the manual says.

Paolo