On 1/22/2025 4:24 AM, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
On Fri, 2025-01-10 at 12:47 +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
0x1f needs clarification here.
If it's going to use the maximum leaf KVM can support, it should be 0x24
to align with __do_cpuid_func().
alternatively, it can use the EAX value of leaf 0 returned by TDX
module. That is the value TDX module presents to the TD guest.
+ output_e = &td_cpuid->entries[i];
+ i += tdx_vcpu_get_cpuid_leaf(vcpu, leaf,
+ KVM_MAX_CPUID_ENTRIES - i - 1,
+ output_e);
+ }
+
+ for (leaf = 0x80000000; leaf <= 0x80000008; leaf++) {
+ output_e = &td_cpuid->entries[i];
+ i += tdx_vcpu_get_cpuid_leaf(vcpu, leaf,
+ KVM_MAX_CPUID_ENTRIES - i - 1,
+ output_e);
Since we are not filtering by KVM supported features anymore, maybe just use the
max leaf for the host CPU, like:
host value is not matched with the value returned by TDX module.
I.e., On my SPR machine, the boot_cpu_data.cpuid_level is 0x20, while
TDX module returns 0x23. It at least fails to report the leaf 0x21 to
userspace, which is a always valid leaf for TD guest.
@@ -2790,14 +2791,14 @@ static int tdx_vcpu_get_cpuid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
struct kvm_tdx_cmd *cmd)
if (!td_cpuid)
return -ENOMEM;
- for (leaf = 0; leaf <= 0x1f; leaf++) {
+ for (leaf = 0; leaf <= boot_cpu_data.cpuid_level; leaf++) {
output_e = &td_cpuid->entries[i];
i += tdx_vcpu_get_cpuid_leaf(vcpu, leaf,
KVM_MAX_CPUID_ENTRIES - i - 1,
output_e);
}
- for (leaf = 0x80000000; leaf <= 0x80000008; leaf++) {
+ for (leaf = 0x80000000; leaf <= boot_cpu_data.extended_cpuid_level;
leaf++) {
output_e = &td_cpuid->entries[i];
i += tdx_vcpu_get_cpuid_leaf(vcpu, leaf,
KVM_MAX_CPUID_ENTRIES - i - 1,
