Wincy Van wrote on 2015-01-28:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Zhang, Yang Z <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>> @@ -5812,13 +5813,18 @@ static __init int hardware_setup(void)
>>> (unsigned long
>>> *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL);
>>> if (!vmx_msr_bitmap_longmode_x2apic)
>>> goto out4;
>>> +
>>> + vmx_msr_bitmap_nested = (unsigned long
>>> *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!vmx_msr_bitmap_nested)
>>> + goto out5;
>>> +
>>
>> Since the nested virtualization is off by default. It's better to
>> allocate the page only when nested is true. Maybe adding the following
>> check is better:
>>
>> if (nested) {
>> vmx_msr_bitmap_nested = (unsigned long
>> *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL); if (!vmx_msr_bitmap_nested)
>> goto out5;
>> }
>
> Agreed. Will do.
>
>>
>> ...snip...
>>
>>> +
>>> +/*
>>> + * Merge L0's and L1's MSR bitmap, return false to indicate that
>>> + * we do not use the hardware.
>>> + */
>>> +static inline bool nested_vmx_merge_msr_bitmap(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>> + struct vmcs12
>>> *vmcs12) {
>>> + return false;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>> The following patches have nothing to do with the MSR control. Why
>> leave the function empty here?
>>
>
> No. In patch "Enable nested virtualize x2apic mode", we will return
> false if L1 disabled virt_x2apic_mode, then the hardware MSR-bitmap control is disabled.
> This is faster than rebuilding the vmx_msr_bitmap_nested.
> This function returns false here to indicate that we do not use the hardware.
> Since It is not only virtualize x2apic mode using this, other features
> may use this either. I think it isn't suitable to introduce this function in other patches.
Yes, rebuilding is more costly. But your current implementation cannot leverage the APICv feature correctly. I replied in another thread.
>
>
>> Best regards,
>> Yang
>>
>>
Best regards,
Yang
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����o�^n�r������&��z�ޗ�zf���h���~����������_��+v���)ߣ�
