Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 16/10/2018 18:50, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> + if (!hv_evmcs || !(hv_evmcs->hv_clean_fields &
>> + HV_VMX_ENLIGHTENED_CLEAN_FIELD_GUEST_GRP2)) {
>> + vmcs_write16(GUEST_CS_SELECTOR, vmcs12->guest_cs_selector);
>> + vmcs_write32(GUEST_CS_LIMIT, vmcs12->guest_cs_limit);
>> + vmcs_write32(GUEST_CS_AR_BYTES, vmcs12->guest_cs_ar_bytes);
>> + vmcs_writel(GUEST_ES_BASE, vmcs12->guest_es_base);
>> + vmcs_writel(GUEST_CS_BASE, vmcs12->guest_cs_base);
>> + }
>
> For what it's worth, I suspect that these can be moved to
> prepare_vmcs02_full. The initial implementation of shadow VMCS did not
> expose "unrestricted guest" to the L1 hypervisor, and emulation does a
> lot of accesses to CS (of course). Not sure how ES base ended up in
> there and not DS base, though...
I tried unshadowing all these fields and at least Hyper-V on KVM
(without using eVMCS of course) experiences a 1200-1300 cpu cycles
regression during tight cpuid loop test. I checked and this happens
because it likes vmreading GUEST_CS_AR_BYTES a lot.
--
Vitaly
