Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] KVM: x86: SGX vs. XCR0 cleanups

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5/3/23 18:08, Sean Christopherson wrote:
Stop adjusting the guest's CPUID info for the allowed XFRM (a.k.a. XCR0)
for SGX enclaves.  Past me didn't understand the roles and responsibilities
between userspace and KVM with respect to CPUID leafs, i.e. I thought I was
being helpful by having KVM adjust the entries.

This is clearly an ABI change, but QEMU does the right thing and AFAIK no
other VMMs support SGX (yet), so I'm hopeful/confident that we can excise
the ugly before userspace starts depending on the bad behavior.
v2:
  - Collect reviews/testing. [Kai]
  - Require FP+SSE to always be set in XFRM, and exempt them from the XFRM
    vs. XCR0 check. [Kai]

v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230405005911.423699-1-seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx

Sean Christopherson (3):
   KVM: VMX: Don't rely _only_ on CPUID to enforce XCR0 restrictions for
     ECREATE
   KVM: x86: Don't adjust guest's CPUID.0x12.1 (allowed SGX enclave XFRM)
   KVM: x86: Open code supported XCR0 calculation in
     kvm_vcpu_after_set_cpuid()

  arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c   | 43 ++++++++++--------------------------------
  arch/x86/kvm/vmx/sgx.c | 11 +++++++++--
  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)


base-commit: 5c291b93e5d665380dbecc6944973583f9565ee5

Queued, thanks. But why patch 3? Small functions are nice and remove the need to remember what is in EDX:EAX of CPUID[0xD,0].

Paolo




[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux