On Mon, Jan 25, 2021, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 25/01/21 20:16, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > }
> > > +static bool vmx_get_nested_state_pages(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > > +{
> > > + if (!nested_get_evmcs_page(vcpu))
> > > + return false;
> > > +
> > > + if (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && !nested_get_vmcs12_pages(vcpu))
> > > + return false;
> > nested_get_evmcs_page() will get called twice in the common case of
> > is_guest_mode() == true. I can't tell if that will ever be fatal, but it's
> > definitely weird. Maybe this?
> >
> > if (!is_guest_mode(vcpu))
> > return nested_get_evmcs_page(vcpu);
> >
> > return nested_get_vmcs12_pages(vcpu);
> >
>
> I wouldn't say there is a common case;
Eh, I would argue that it is more common to do KVM_REQ_GET_NESTED_STATE_PAGES
with is_guest_mode() than it is with !is_guest_mode(), as the latter is valid if
and only if eVMCS is in use. But, I think we're only vying for internet points. :-)
> however the idea was to remove the call to nested_get_evmcs_page from
> nested_get_vmcs12_pages, since that one is only needed after
> KVM_GET_NESTED_STATE and not during VMLAUNCH/VMRESUME.
I'm confused, this patch explicitly adds a call to nested_get_evmcs_page() in
nested_get_vmcs12_pages().
