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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201007014417.29276-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
 <99334de1-ba3d-dfac-0730-e637d39b948f@yandex.ru> <20201008175951.GA9267@linux.intel.com>
 <7efe1398-24c0-139f-29fa-3d89b6013f34@yandex.ru> <20201009040453.GA10744@linux.intel.com>
 <5dfa55f3-ecdf-9f8d-2d45-d2e6e54f2daa@yandex.ru> <20201009153053.GA16234@linux.intel.com>
 <b38dff0b-7e6d-3f3e-9724-8e280938628a@yandex.ru> <c206865e-b2da-b996-3d48-2c71d7783fbc@redhat.com>
 <c0c473c1-93af-2a52-bb35-c32f9e96faea@yandex.ru>
In-Reply-To: <c0c473c1-93af-2a52-bb35-c32f9e96faea@yandex.ru>
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Dec 2020 15:59:19 -0800
Message-ID: <CALMp9eSMt1DwXL=wE-xyHcOyCvZzzHdgZ=N9Pqdm1CW6aSzOKw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: KVM_SET_CPUID doesn't check supported bits (was Re: [PATCH 0/6]
 KVM: x86: KVM_SET_SREGS.CR4 bug fixes and cleanup)
To:     stsp <stsp2@yandex.ru>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 3:47 AM stsp <stsp2@yandex.ru> wrote:
>
> 07.12.2020 14:29, Paolo Bonzini =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
> > On 07/12/20 12:24, stsp wrote:
> >> It tries to enable VME among other things.
> >> qemu appears to disable VME by default,
> >> unless you do "-cpu host". So we have a situation where
> >> the host (which is qemu) doesn't have VME,
> >> and guest (dosemu) is trying to enable it.
> >> Now obviously KVM_SET_CPUID doesn't check anyting
> >> at all and returns success. That later turns
> >> into an invalid guest state.
> >>
> >>
> >> Question: should KVM_SET_CPUID check for
> >> supported bits, end return error if not everything
> >> is supported?
> >
> > No, it is intentional.  Most bits of CPUID are not ever checked by
> > KVM, so userspace is supposed to set values that makes sense
> By "that makes sense" you probably
> meant to say "bits_that_makes_sense masked
> with the ones returned by KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID"?
>
> So am I right that KVM_SET_CPUID only "lowers"
> the supported bits? In which case I don't need to
> call it at all, but instead just call KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
> and see if the needed bits are supported, and
> exit otherwise, right?

"Lowers" is a tricky concept for CPUID information. Some feature bits
report 0 for "present" and 1 for "not-present." Some multi-bit fields
are interpreted as numbers, which may be signed or unsigned. Some
multi-bit fields are strings. Some fields have dependencies on other
fields. Etc.