On 7/21/2023 11:03 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
On Fri, Jul 21, 2023, Binbin Wu wrote:
On 7/21/2023 7:53 AM, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 10:41:24PM +0800,
Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Add and use kvm_vcpu_is_legal_cr3() to check CR3's legality to provide
a clear distinction b/t CR3 and GPA checks. So that kvm_vcpu_is_legal_cr3()
can be adjusted according to new feature(s).
No functional change intended.
Signed-off-by: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.h | 5 +++++
arch/x86/kvm/svm/nested.c | 4 ++--
arch/x86/kvm/vmx/nested.c | 4 ++--
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 4 ++--
4 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.h b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.h
index f61a2106ba90..8b26d946f3e3 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.h
@@ -283,4 +283,9 @@ static __always_inline bool guest_can_use(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
return vcpu->arch.governed_features.enabled & kvm_governed_feature_bit(x86_feature);
}
+static inline bool kvm_vcpu_is_legal_cr3(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long cr3)
+{
+ return kvm_vcpu_is_legal_gpa(vcpu, cr3);
+}
+
The remaining user of kvm_vcpu_is_illegal_gpa() is one left. Can we remove it
by replacing !kvm_vcpu_is_legal_gpa()?
There are still two callsites of kvm_vcpu_is_illegal_gpa() left (basing on
Linux 6.5-rc2), in handle_ept_violation() and nested_vmx_check_eptp().
But they could be replaced by !kvm_vcpu_is_legal_gpa() and then remove
kvm_vcpu_is_illegal_gpa().
I am neutral to this.
I'm largely neutral on this as well, though I do like the idea of having only
"legal" APIs. I think it makes sense to throw together a patch, we can always
ignore the patch if end we up deciding to keep kvm_vcpu_is_illegal_gpa().
OK. Thanks for the advice.
Should I send a seperate patch or add a patch to remove
kvm_vcpu_is_illegal_gpa() in next version?
