On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 01:36:42PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > Check KVM CPU capabilities instead of raw VMX support for XSAVES when > determining whether or not XSAVER can/should be exposed to the guest. > Practically speaking, it's nonsensical/impossible for a CPU to support > "enable XSAVES" without XSAVES being supported natively. The real > motivation for checking kvm_cpu_cap_has() is to allow using the governed > feature's standard check-and-set logic. > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Yuan Yao <yuan.yao@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > index 1bf85bd53416..78f292b7e2c5 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > @@ -7745,7 +7745,7 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_after_set_cpuid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > * to the guest. XSAVES depends on CR4.OSXSAVE, and CR4.OSXSAVE can be > * set if and only if XSAVE is supported. > */ > - vcpu->arch.xsaves_enabled = cpu_has_vmx_xsaves() && > + vcpu->arch.xsaves_enabled = kvm_cpu_cap_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVES) && > boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVE) && > guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_XSAVE) && > guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_XSAVES); > -- > 2.41.0.694.ge786442a9b-goog >
