On 1/26/22 18:48, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 1/26/22 18:22, Sean Christopherson wrote:
For convenience, Like's patch split up and applied on top of Xiaoyao.
Tagged all for @stable, probably want to (retroactively?) get Xiaoyao's
patch tagged too?
Like Xu (2):
KVM: x86: Update vCPU's runtime CPUID on write to MSR_IA32_XSS
KVM: x86: Sync the states size with the XCR0/IA32_XSS at, any time
Xiaoyao Li (1):
KVM: x86: Keep MSR_IA32_XSS unchanged for INIT
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
base-commit: e2e83a73d7ce66f62c7830a85619542ef59c90e4
Queued, though I'll note that I kinda disagree with the stable@ marking of
patch 1 (and therefore with the patch order) as it has no effect in
practice.
Hmm, that's not a given, is it? E.g. the guest can configure XSS early on and
then expect the configured value to live across INIT-SIPI-SIPI. I agree it's
highly unlikely for any guest to actually do that, but I don't like assuming all
guests will behave a certain way.
No, I meant in the sense that supported_xss is always zero right now,
and therefore so is MSR_IA32_XSS.
Paolo
