Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> This msr is only available when the host supports WAITPKG feature.
>
> This breaks a nested guest, if the L1 hypervisor is set to ignore
> unknown msrs, because the only other safety check that the
> kernel does is that it attempts to read the msr and
> rejects it if it gets an exception.
>
> Fixes: 6e3ba4abce KVM: vmx: Emulate MSR IA32_UMWAIT_CONTROL
>
> Signed-off-by: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index fe3a24fd6b263..9c507b32b1b77 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -5314,6 +5314,10 @@ static void kvm_init_msr_list(void)
> if (msrs_to_save_all[i] - MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL0 >=
> min(INTEL_PMC_MAX_GENERIC, x86_pmu.num_counters_gp))
> continue;
> + break;
> + case MSR_IA32_UMWAIT_CONTROL:
> + if (!kvm_cpu_cap_has(X86_FEATURE_WAITPKG))
> + continue;
I'm probably missing something but (if I understand correctly) the only
effect of dropping MSR_IA32_UMWAIT_CONTROL from msrs_to_save would be
that KVM userspace won't see it in e.g. KVM_GET_MSR_INDEX_LIST. But why
is this causing an issue? I see both vmx_get_msr()/vmx_set_msr() have
'host_initiated' check:
case MSR_IA32_UMWAIT_CONTROL:
if (!msr_info->host_initiated && !vmx_has_waitpkg(vmx))
return 1;
so KVM userspace should be able to read/write this MSR even when there's
no hardware support for it. Or who's trying to read/write it?
Also, kvm_cpu_cap_has() check is not equal to vmx_has_waitpkg() which
checks secondary execution controls.
> default:
> break;
> }
--
Vitaly
