Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALMp9eRJ_v0M0XuacCy4ZfwapygDDKN1+bYM4QudaOY6fJLJBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1509669327-3940-1-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
 <1509669327-3940-2-git-send-email-wanpeng.li@hotmail.com> <CALMp9eRJ_v0M0XuacCy4ZfwapygDDKN1+bYM4QudaOY6fJLJBQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Nov 2017 09:32:13 +0800
Message-ID: <CANRm+CyPweGvn-4Vt9JW9=HwkZnGoOySL7Jnaj+sVzATrBkWTA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM: nVMX: Validate the IA32_BNDCFGS on nested VM-entry
To:     Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

2017-11-04 1:52 GMT+08:00 Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>:
> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> wrote:
>> From: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
>>
>> According to the SDM, if the "load IA32_BNDCFGS" VM-entry controls is 1,=
 the
>> following checks are performed on the field for the IA32_BNDCFGS MSR:
>>  - Bits reserved in the IA32_BNDCFGS MSR must be 0.
>>  - The linear address in bits 63:12 must be canonical.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
>> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Radim Kr=C4=8Dm=C3=A1=C5=99 <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
>> ---
>> v3 -> v4:
>>  * simply condition
>>  * use && instead of nested "if"s
>>
>>  arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> index e6c8ffa..6cf3972 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
>> @@ -10805,6 +10805,11 @@ static int check_vmentry_postreqs(struct kvm_vc=
pu *vcpu, struct vmcs12 *vmcs12,
>>                         return 1;
>>         }
>>
>> +       if (kvm_mpx_supported() &&
>
> I think you kept the wrong conjunct from the previous version. Drop
> kvm_mpx_supported() and restore the test for
> (vmcs12->vm_entry_controls & VM_ENTRY_LOAD_BNDCFGS).

Yeah, I misunderstand the English.

Regards,
Wanpeng Li

From 1583068486025388850@xxx Fri Nov 03 17:55:56 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1583003090430485903
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread