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: SVM: Use a separate vmcb for the nested L2 guest
To:     Cathy Avery <cavery@redhat.com>, Wei Huang <wei.huang2@amd.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        vkuznets@redhat.com
References: <20200917192306.2080-1-cavery@redhat.com>
 <20200918211109.GA803484@weilap>
 <7549df39-b00b-0b0e-9f25-f64cdf6db366@redhat.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <c3645ce6-5110-9bcc-450d-69e3f6aabc6a@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Sep 2020 17:02:46 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7549df39-b00b-0b0e-9f25-f64cdf6db366@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 21/09/20 16:07, Cathy Avery wrote:
>>>   -    if (npt_enabled)
>>> -        svm->vmcb->save.cr3 = hsave->save.cr3;
>>> +    if (!npt_enabled)
>>> +        svm->vmcb01->save.cr3 = kvm_read_cr3(&svm->vcpu);
>> Does this mean the original code is missing the following?
>>
>>          else
>>         svm->vmcb01->save.cr3 = kvm_read_cr3(&svm->vcpu);
> No it means I made an assumption here. I'll look at this again.

This should not be needed, nested_svm_load_cr3's call to kvm_init_mmu
should write to svm->vmcb->save.cr3.

>>>
>>> +    unsigned long vmcb01_pa;
>> Any reason that vmcb01_pa can't be placed in "struct vcpu_svm" below, along
>> with vmcb01?
> I just grouped it with the other nesting components. I can move it.

Please do it, vmcb01 is not part of nesting.

>     static inline struct vmcb *get_host_vmcb(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>   {
> -    if (is_guest_mode(&svm->vcpu))
> -        return svm->nested.hsave;
> -    else
> -        return svm->vmcb;
> +    return svm->vmcb01; 

You can remove the function altogether (in a second patch).

Paolo