On Fri, May 12, 2023, Kai Huang wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-05-11 at 16:33 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > index e7f78fe79b32..8b356c9d8a81 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > @@ -3700,8 +3700,9 @@ int kvm_set_msr_common(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> > return 1;
> > }
> > break;
> > - case 0x200 ... MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL2 - 1:
> > - case MSR_IA32_MCx_CTL2(KVM_MAX_MCE_BANKS) ... 0x2ff:
> > + case MSR_IA32_CR_PAT:
> > + case MTRRphysBase_MSR(0) ... MSR_MTRRfix4K_F8000:
> > + case MSR_MTRRdefType:
> > return kvm_mtrr_set_msr(vcpu, msr, data);
> > case MSR_IA32_APICBASE:
> > return kvm_set_apic_base(vcpu, msr_info);
> > @@ -4108,9 +4109,10 @@ int kvm_get_msr_common(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> > msr_info->data = kvm_scale_tsc(rdtsc(), ratio) + offset;
> > break;
> > }
> > + case MSR_IA32_CR_PAT:
> > case MSR_MTRRcap:
>
> ... Should we put MSR_IA32_CR_PAT after MSR_MTRRcap so it can be symmetric to
> kvm_set_msr_common()?
>
> Looks there's no reason to put it before MSR_MTRRcap.
No, it's above MTRRcap for two reasons:
1. When PAT is moved out of mtrr.c, PAT doesn't get bunded with the other MTRRs
and so would just need to be hoisted back up. The end code looks like:
case MSR_IA32_CR_PAT:
msr_info->data = vcpu->arch.pat;
break;
case MSR_MTRRcap:
case MTRRphysBase_MSR(0) ... MSR_MTRRfix4K_F8000:
case MSR_MTRRdefType:
return kvm_mtrr_get_msr(vcpu, msr_info->index, &msr_info->data);
2. There is no MSR_MTRRcap case statement in kvm_set_msr_common() because it's
a read-only MSR, i.e. the two can't be symmetric :-)
> > - case 0x200 ... MSR_IA32_MC0_CTL2 - 1:
> > - case MSR_IA32_MCx_CTL2(KVM_MAX_MCE_BANKS) ... 0x2ff:
> > + case MTRRphysBase_MSR(0) ... MSR_MTRRfix4K_F8000:
> > + case MSR_MTRRdefType:
> > return kvm_mtrr_get_msr(vcpu, msr_info->index, &msr_info->data);
> > case 0xcd: /* fsb frequency */
> > msr_info->data = 3;
> > --
> > 2.40.1.606.ga4b1b128d6-goog
> >
>
