On 4/16/20 2:18 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 15/04/20 22:18, Jim Mattson wrote:
Has anyone worked through all the flows to verify this won't break any
assumptions with respect to enable_unrestricted_guest? I would be
(pleasantly) surprised if this was sufficient to run L2 without
unrestricted guest when it's enabled for L1, e.g. vmx_set_cr0() looks
suspect.
I think you're right to be concerned.
Thirded, but it shouldn't be too hard. Basically,
enable_unrestricted_guest must be moved into loaded_vmcs for this to
work. It may be more work to write the test cases for L2 real mode <->
protected mode switch, which do not entirely fit into the vmx_tests.c
framework (but with the v2 tests it should not be hard to adapt).
OK, I will move enable_unrestricted_guest to loaded_vmcs.
I also see that enable_ept controls the setting of
enable_unrestricted_guest. Perhaps both need to be moved to loaded_vmcs ?
About testing, I am thinking the test will first vmlaunch L2 in real
mode or in protected mode, then vmexit on vmcall and then vmresume in
the other mode. Is that how the test should flow ?
Paolo
