Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Fri, 15 Apr 2022 14:35:48 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Zeng Guang <guang.zeng@intel.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@amd.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>,
        Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>,
        "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@intel.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Hu, Robert" <robert.hu@intel.com>,
        "Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 8/8] KVM: VMX: enable IPI virtualization
Message-ID: <YlmCxOcWvbXzaYpw@google.com>
References: <20220304080725.18135-1-guang.zeng@intel.com>
 <20220304080725.18135-9-guang.zeng@intel.com>
 <YkZlhI7nAAqDhT0D@google.com>
 <54df6da8-ad68-cc75-48db-d18fc87430e9@intel.com>
 <YksxiAnNmdR2q65S@google.com>
 <b8f753b0-1b57-3e42-3516-27cc0359c584@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b8f753b0-1b57-3e42-3516-27cc0359c584@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Apr 09, 2022, Zeng Guang wrote:
> 
> On 4/5/2022 1:57 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 03, 2022, Zeng Guang wrote:
> > > On 4/1/2022 10:37 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > > @@ -4219,14 +4226,21 @@ static void vmx_refresh_apicv_exec_ctrl(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > > > >    	pin_controls_set(vmx, vmx_pin_based_exec_ctrl(vmx));
> > > > >    	if (cpu_has_secondary_exec_ctrls()) {
> > > > > -		if (kvm_vcpu_apicv_active(vcpu))
> > > > > +		if (kvm_vcpu_apicv_active(vcpu)) {
> > > > >    			secondary_exec_controls_setbit(vmx,
> > > > >    				      SECONDARY_EXEC_APIC_REGISTER_VIRT |
> > > > >    				      SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUAL_INTR_DELIVERY);
> > > > > -		else
> > > > > +			if (enable_ipiv)
> > > > > +				tertiary_exec_controls_setbit(vmx,
> > > > > +						TERTIARY_EXEC_IPI_VIRT);
> > > > > +		} else {
> > > > >    			secondary_exec_controls_clearbit(vmx,
> > > > >    					SECONDARY_EXEC_APIC_REGISTER_VIRT |
> > > > >    					SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUAL_INTR_DELIVERY);
> > > > > +			if (enable_ipiv)
> > > > > +				tertiary_exec_controls_clearbit(vmx,
> > > > > +						TERTIARY_EXEC_IPI_VIRT);
> > > > Oof.  The existing code is kludgy.  We should never reach this point without
> > > > enable_apicv=true, and enable_apicv should be forced off if APICv isn't supported,
> > > > let alone seconary exec being support.
> > > > 
> > > > Unless I'm missing something, throw a prep patch earlier in the series to drop
> > > > the cpu_has_secondary_exec_ctrls() check, that will clean this code up a smidge.
> > > cpu_has_secondary_exec_ctrls() check can avoid wrong vmcs write in case mistaken
> > > invocation.
> > KVM has far bigger problems on buggy invocation, and in that case the resulting
> > printk + WARN from the failed VMWRITE is a good thing.
> 
> SDM doesn't define VMWRITE failure for such case.

Yes it absolutely does.  cpu_has_secondary_exec_ctrls() checks if the VMCS field
_exists_, not if it's being used by KVM (though that's a moot point since KVM
always enables secondary controls when it's supported).  VMWRITE to non-existent
fields cause VM-Fail.

  ELSIF secondary source operand does not correspond to any VMCS field
  THEN VMfailValid(VMREAD/VMWRITE from/to unsupported VMCS component);