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 v3 0/9] KVM: Support guest MAXPHYADDR < host MAXPHYADDR
To:     Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Cc:     Mohammed Gamal <mgamal@redhat.com>, kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
References: <20200710154811.418214-1-mgamal@redhat.com>
 <CALMp9eRfZ50iyrED0-LU75VWhHu_kVoB2Qw55VzEFzZ=0QCGow@mail.gmail.com>
 <0c892b1e-6fe6-2aa7-602e-f5fadc54c257@redhat.com>
 <CALMp9eQXHGnXo4ACX2-qYww4XdRODMn-O6CAvhupib67Li9S2w@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <9e784c62-15ee-63b7-4942-474493bac536@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Jul 2020 19:16:14 +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: <CALMp9eQXHGnXo4ACX2-qYww4XdRODMn-O6CAvhupib67Li9S2w@mail.gmail.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 10/07/20 19:13, Jim Mattson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 10:06 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/07/20 18:30, Jim Mattson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This can be problem when having a mixed setup of machines with 5-level page
>>>> tables and machines with 4-level page tables, as live migration can change
>>>> MAXPHYADDR while the guest runs, which can theoretically introduce bugs.
>>>
>>> Huh? Changing MAXPHYADDR while the guest runs should be illegal. Or
>>> have I missed some peculiarity of LA57 that makes MAXPHYADDR a dynamic
>>> CPUID information field?
>>
>> Changing _host_ MAXPHYADDR while the guest runs, such as if you migrate
>> from a host-maxphyaddr==46 to a host-maxphyaddr==52 machine (while
>> keeping guest-maxphyaddr==46).
> 
> Ah, but what does that have to do with LA57?

Intel only has MAXPHYADDR > 46 on LA57 machines (because in general OSes
like to have a physical 1:1 map into the kernel part of the virtual
address space, so having a higher MAXPHYADDR would be of limited use
with 48-bit linear addresses).

In other words, while this issue has existed forever it could be ignored
until IceLake introduced MAXPHYADDR==52 machines.  I'll introduce
something like this in a commit message.

Paolo