On Mon, Jul 26, 2021, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 13/07/21 18:32, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > Drop an extra init_vmcb() from svm_create_vcpu(), svm_vcpu_reset() is > > guaranteed to call init_vmcb() and there are no consumers of the VMCB > > data between ->vcpu_create() and ->vcpu_reset(). Keep the call to > > svm_switch_vmcb() as sev_es_create_vcpu() touches the current VMCB, but > > hoist it up a few lines to associate the switch with the allocation of > > vmcb01. > > > > Reviewed-by: Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c | 4 +--- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c > > index 44248548be7d..cef9520fe77f 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c > > @@ -1431,15 +1431,13 @@ static int svm_create_vcpu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > svm->vmcb01.ptr = page_address(vmcb01_page); > > svm->vmcb01.pa = __sme_set(page_to_pfn(vmcb01_page) << PAGE_SHIFT); > > + svm_switch_vmcb(svm, &svm->vmcb01); > > if (vmsa_page) > > svm->vmsa = page_address(vmsa_page); > > svm->guest_state_loaded = false; > > - svm_switch_vmcb(svm, &svm->vmcb01); > > - init_vmcb(vcpu); > > - > > svm_init_osvw(vcpu); > > vcpu->arch.microcode_version = 0x01000065; > > While this patch makes sense, I'd rather not include it to reduce the part > of the code in which svm->vmcb is NULL. Not sure I follow. The svm_switch_vmcb() is kept, and even moved earlier.
