>>> On 4/26/2016 at 08:54 PM, Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2016-02-09 0:29 GMT+08:00 Bruce Rogers <brogers@xxxxxxxx>: >>>>> On 2/8/2016 at 08:09 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 03/02/2016 23:51, Bruce Rogers wrote: >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c >>>> index e2951b6..21507b4 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c >>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c >>>> @@ -4993,8 +4993,8 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool >>> init_event) >>>> vmcs_write16(VIRTUAL_PROCESSOR_ID, vmx->vpid); >>>> >>>> cr0 = X86_CR0_NW | X86_CR0_CD | X86_CR0_ET; >>>> - vmx_set_cr0(vcpu, cr0); /* enter rmode */ >>>> vmx->vcpu.arch.cr0 = cr0; >>>> + vmx_set_cr0(vcpu, cr0); /* enter rmode */ >>> >>> Your comment that the assignment is redundant is correct, but I am >>> afraid that this fix is also wrong. In particular, it would not cause >>> exit_lmode and enter_rmode to be called. >>> >>> You are not describing which call to kvm_mmu_reset_context was messed >>> up, so I'm not sure how your patch is fixing things. >> >> This is in the context of AP sending INIT to BSP with unrestricted_guest=N. > > BSP will broadcast INIT-SIPI-SIPI sequence to APs during > initialization, could you point out when "AP sending INIT to BSP" as > you mentioned above in SDM? > You should know that I abandoned this patch series as further investigation revealed that this was not as cut and dried as I had first hoped. Bruce -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
