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: VMX: Make smaller physical guest address space
 support user-configurable
To:     Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>, Mohammed Gamal <mgamal@redhat.com>,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com,
        vkuznets@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com, jmattson@google.com,
        joro@8bytes.org, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
References: <20200903141122.72908-1-mgamal@redhat.com>
 <1f42d8f084083cdf6933977eafbb31741080f7eb.camel@redhat.com>
 <e1dee0fd2b4be9d8ea183d3cf6d601cf9566fde9.camel@redhat.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <ebcd39a5-364f-c4ac-f8c7-41057a3d84be@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 29 Sep 2020 14:26:13 +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: <e1dee0fd2b4be9d8ea183d3cf6d601cf9566fde9.camel@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 29/09/20 13:59, Qian Cai wrote:
> 
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!allow_smaller_maxphyaddr);
> 
> I noticed the origin patch did not have this WARN_ON_ONCE(), but the mainline
> commit b96e6506c2ea ("KVM: x86: VMX: Make smaller physical guest address space
> support user-configurable") does have it for some reasons.

Because that part of the code should not be reached.  The exception
bitmap is set up with

        if (!vmx_need_pf_intercept(vcpu))
                eb &= ~(1u << PF_VECTOR);

where

static inline bool vmx_need_pf_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
        if (!enable_ept)
                return true;

        return allow_smaller_maxphyaddr &&
		 cpuid_maxphyaddr(vcpu) < boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits;
}

We shouldn't get here if "enable_ept && !allow_smaller_maxphyaddr",
which implies vmx_need_pf_intercept(vcpu) == false.  So the warning is
genuine; I've sent a patch.

Paolo