On 22/03/2023 18:01, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm_onhyperv.h b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm_onhyperv.h
>>> index cff838f15db5..d91e019fb7da 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm_onhyperv.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm_onhyperv.h
>>> @@ -15,6 +15,13 @@ static struct kvm_x86_ops svm_x86_ops;
>>>
>>> int svm_hv_enable_l2_tlb_flush(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>>>
>>> +static inline bool svm_hv_is_enlightened_tlb_enabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> +{
>>> + struct hv_vmcb_enlightenments *hve = &to_svm(vcpu)->vmcb->control.hv_enlightenments;
>>> +
>>> + return !!hve->hv_enlightenments_control.enlightened_npt_tlb;
>>
>> In theory, we should not look at Hyper-V enlightenments in VMCB control
>> just because our kernel has CONFIG_HYPERV enabled.
>
> Oooh, right, because hv_enlightenments uses software reserved bits, and in theory
> KVM could be running on a different hypervisor that uses those bits for something
> completely different.
>
>> I'd suggest we add a
>> real check that we're running on Hyper-V and we can do it the same way
>> it is done in svm_hv_hardware_setup()/svm_hv_init_vmcb():
>>
>> return (ms_hyperv.nested_features & HV_X64_NESTED_ENLIGHTENED_TLB)
>> && !!hve->hv_enlightenments_control.enlightened_npt_tlb;
>
> Jeremi, if you grab this, can you put the && on the previous line? I.e.
>
> return (ms_hyperv.nested_features & HV_X64_NESTED_ENLIGHTENED_TLB) &&
> !!hve->hv_enlightenments_control.enlightened_npt_tlb;
Will do. I'll need to read the replies in more detail tomorrow.
