Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 28 Jun 2022 01:38:17 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     "Dong, Eddie" <eddie.dong@intel.com>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Anirudh Rayabharam <anrayabh@linux.microsoft.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>,
        "linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] KVM: VMX: Extend VMX controls macro shenanigans
Message-ID: <YrpbiWw1E4DXQ962@google.com>
References: <20220627160440.31857-1-vkuznets@redhat.com>
 <20220627160440.31857-5-vkuznets@redhat.com>
 <BL0PR11MB304264B62299D642FF906C298AB99@BL0PR11MB3042.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BL0PR11MB304264B62299D642FF906C298AB99@BL0PR11MB3042.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 27, 2022, Dong, Eddie wrote:
> >  static inline void lname##_controls_clearbit(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx, u##bits
> > val)	\
> >  {
> > 	\
> > +	BUILD_BUG_ON(!(val & (KVM_REQ_VMX_##uname |
> > KVM_OPT_VMX_##uname)));	\
> >  	lname##_controls_set(vmx, lname##_controls_get(vmx) & ~val);
> > 	\
> >  }
> 
> With this, will it be safer if we present L1 CTRL MSRs with the bits KVM
> really uses? Do I miss something?

KVM will still allow L1 to use features/controls that KVM itself doesn't use, but
exposing features/controls that KVM doesn't use will require a more explicit
"override" of sorts, e.g. to prevent advertising features that are supported in
hardware, known to KVM, but disabled for whatever reason, e.g. a CPU bug, eVMCS
incompatibility, module param, etc...

The intent of this BUILD_BUG_ON() is to detect KVM usage of bits that aren't enabled
by default, i.e. to lower the probability that a control gets used by KVM but isn't
exposed to L1 because it's a dynamically enabled control.