On 5/18/2024 1:39 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
[...]
index e021681f34ac..ad0168d3aec5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.h
@@ -259,10 +259,10 @@ static __always_inline bool kvm_is_governed_feature(unsigned int x86_feature)
static __always_inline void guest_cpu_cap_set(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
unsigned int x86_feature)
{
- BUILD_BUG_ON(!kvm_is_governed_feature(x86_feature));
+ unsigned int x86_leaf = __feature_leaf(x86_feature);
- __set_bit(kvm_governed_feature_index(x86_feature),
- vcpu->arch.governed_features.enabled);
+ reverse_cpuid_check(x86_leaf);
This reverse_cpuid_check() seems unnecessary since in patch(17), we already have moved it in
__feature_leaf(). But I don't have full source code to double check it now.
+ vcpu->arch.cpu_caps[x86_leaf] |= __feature_bit(x86_feature);
}
static __always_inline void guest_cpu_cap_check_and_set(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
@@ -275,10 +275,10 @@ static __always_inline void guest_cpu_cap_check_and_set(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
static __always_inline bool guest_cpu_cap_has(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
unsigned int x86_feature)
{
- BUILD_BUG_ON(!kvm_is_governed_feature(x86_feature));
+ unsigned int x86_leaf = __feature_leaf(x86_feature);
- return test_bit(kvm_governed_feature_index(x86_feature),
- vcpu->arch.governed_features.enabled);
+ reverse_cpuid_check(x86_leaf);
Ditto.
+ return vcpu->arch.cpu_caps[x86_leaf] & __feature_bit(x86_feature);
}
[...]
