On Thu, Jul 28, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 7/25/22 20:18, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > I kind of like the idea of having a two-dimensional array based on the enums
> > > instead of switch statements, so for now I'll keep Vitaly's enums.
> > I don't have a strong opinion on using a 2d array, but unless I'm missing something,
> > that's nowhere to be found in this patch. IMO, having the enums without them
> > providing any unique value is silly and obfuscates the code.
>
> Yeah, like this:
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/evmcs.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/evmcs.c
> index d8da4026c93d..8055128d8638 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/evmcs.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/evmcs.c
> @@ -342,9 +342,10 @@ uint16_t nested_get_evmcs_version(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> return 0;
> }
> -enum evmcs_v1_revision {
> +enum evmcs_revision {
> EVMCSv1_2016,
> EVMCSv1_2022,
> + EVMCS_REVISION_MAX,
> };
> enum evmcs_unsupported_ctrl_type {
> @@ -353,13 +354,37 @@ enum evmcs_unsupported_ctrl_type {
> EVMCS_2NDEXEC,
> EVMCS_PINCTRL,
> EVMCS_VMFUNC,
> + EVMCS_CTRL_MAX,
> +};
> +
> +static u32 evmcs_unsupported_ctls[EVMCS_CTRL_MAX][EVMCS_REVISION_MAX] = {
Can this be const?
> + [EVMCS_EXIT_CTLS] = {
> + [EVMCSv1_2016] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_VMEXIT_CTRL | VM_EXIT_LOAD_IA32_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL,
> + [EVMCSv1_2022] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_VMEXIT_CTRL,
> + },
> + [EVMCS_ENTRY_CTLS] = {
> + [EVMCSv1_2016] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_VMENTRY_CTRL | VM_ENTRY_LOAD_IA32_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL,
> + [EVMCSv1_2022] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_VMENTRY_CTRL,
> + },
> + [EVMCS_2NDEXEC] = {
> + [EVMCSv1_2016] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_2NDEXEC | SECONDARY_EXEC_TSC_SCALING,
> + [EVMCSv1_2022] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_2NDEXEC,
> + },
> + [EVMCS_PINCTRL] = {
> + [EVMCSv1_2016] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_PINCTRL,
> + [EVMCSv1_2022] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_PINCTRL,
> + },
> + [EVMCS_VMFUNC] = {
> + [EVMCSv1_2016] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_VMFUNC,
> + [EVMCSv1_2022] = EVMCS1_UNSUPPORTED_VMFUNC,
> + },
> };
...
> + return evmcs_unsupported_ctls[ctrl_type][evmcs_rev];
> }
The only flaw in this is if KVM gets handed a CPUID model that enumerates support
for 2025 (or whenever the next update comes) but not 2022. Hmm, though if Microsoft
defines each new "version" as a full superset, then even that theoretical bug goes
away. I'm happy to be optimistic for once and give this a shot. I definitely like
that it makes it easier to see the deltas between versions.
