On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:32:14PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:08:07PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > The logic for calculating the value with which we call kvm_set_cr0/4 was > > broken (will definitely be visible with nested unrestricted guest mode > > support). Also, we performed the check regarding CR0_ALWAYSON too early > > when in guest mode. > > > > What really needs to be done on both CR0 and CR4 is to mask out L1-owned > > bits and merge them in from L1's guest_cr0/4. In contrast, arch.cr0/4 > > and arch.cr0/4_guest_owned_bits contain the mangled L0+L1 state and, > > thus, are not suited as input. > > > > For both CRs, we can then apply the check against VMXON_CRx_ALWAYSON and > > refuse the update if it fails. To be fully consistent, we implement this > > check now also for CR4. For CR4, we move the check into vmx_set_cr4 > > while we keep it in handle_set_cr0. This is because the CR0 checks for > > vmxon vs. guest mode will diverge soon when adding unrestricted guest > > mode support. > > > > Finally, we have to set the shadow to the value L2 wanted to write > > originally. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxx> Applied, thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
