On 05/11/19 13:51, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> On 11/5/2019 7:30 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 05/11/19 10:20, Chenyi Qiang wrote:
>>> The three msr number lists(msrs_to_save[], emulated_msrs[] and
>>> msr_based_features[]) are global arrays of kvm.ko, which are
>>> initialized/adjusted (copy supported MSRs forward to override the
>>> unsupported MSRs) when installing kvm-{intel,amd}.ko, but it doesn't
>>> reset these three arrays to their initial value when uninstalling
>>> kvm-{intel,amd}.ko. Thus, at the next installation, kvm-{intel,amd}.ko
>>> will initialize the modified arrays with some MSRs lost and some MSRs
>>> duplicated.
>>>
>>> So allocate and initialize these three MSR number lists dynamically when
>>> installing kvm-{intel,amd}.ko and free them when uninstalling.
>>>
>>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Reviewed-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chenyi Qiang <chenyi.qiang@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>>> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> index ff395f812719..08efcf6351cc 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> @@ -1132,13 +1132,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_rdpmc);
>>> * List of msr numbers which we expose to userspace through
>>> KVM_GET_MSRS
>>> * and KVM_SET_MSRS, and KVM_GET_MSR_INDEX_LIST.
>>> *
>>> - * This list is modified at module load time to reflect the
>>> + * The three msr number lists(msrs_to_save, emulated_msrs,
>>> msr_based_features)
>>> + * are allocated and initialized at module load time and freed at
>>> unload time.
>>> + * msrs_to_save is selected from the msrs_to_save_all to reflect the
>>> * capabilities of the host cpu. This capabilities test skips MSRs
>>> that are
>>> - * kvm-specific. Those are put in emulated_msrs; filtering of
>>> emulated_msrs
>>> + * kvm-specific. Those are put in emulated_msrs_all; filtering of
>>> emulated_msrs
>>> * may depend on host virtualization features rather than host cpu
>>> features.
>>> */
>>> -static u32 msrs_to_save[] = {
>>> +const u32 msrs_to_save_all[] = {
>>
>> This can remain static.
>
> How about static const u32 msrs_to_save_all[] ?
>
> Or you think static is enough?
"static const" is best indeed (that's what I meant, but I wasn't very
clear).
Paolo
>>> MSR_IA32_SYSENTER_CS, MSR_IA32_SYSENTER_ESP,
>>> MSR_IA32_SYSENTER_EIP,
>>> MSR_STAR,
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>>> @@ -1179,9 +1181,10 @@ static u32 msrs_to_save[] = {
>>> MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL0 + 16, MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL0 + 17,
>>> };
>>> +static u32 *msrs_to_save;
>>
>> You can use ARRAY_SIZE to allocate the destination arrays statically.
>
> It's much better, then we don't need to allocation and free.
>
>> Paolo
>>
