Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] KVM: x86: add KVM_HC_UCALL hypercall

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 6:05 PM Liran Alon <liran.alon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 01/05/2020 23:45, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Off the top of my head, IO and/or MMIO has a few advantages:
> >
> >    - Allows the guest kernel to delegate permissions to guest userspace,
> >      whereas KVM restrict hypercalls to CPL0.
> >    - Allows "pass-through", whereas VMCALL is unconditionally forwarded to
> >      L1.
> >    - Is vendor agnostic, e.g. VMX and SVM recognized different opcodes for
> >      VMCALL vs VMMCALL.
> I agree with all the above (I believe similar rational had led VMware to
> design their Backdoor PIO interface).

Just to set the record straight...

VMware's backdoor PIO interface predates both VMX and SVM, so VMCALL
and VMMCALL played no role whatsoever in its design. Moreover,
VMware's backdoor PIO interface actually does not allow the guest
kernel to delegate permissions to guest userspace. VMware ignores the
I/O permission bitmap in the TSS for the backdoor ports, so userspace
always has access to them. It's the VMware hypervisor that decides
whether or not to accept certain hypercalls at CPL>0.



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux