lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Dec]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [patch 5/6] x86/fpu: Provide fpu_update_guest_xcr0/xfd()
Date
On Tue, Dec 14 2021 at 15:09, Wei W. Wang wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 14, 2021 10:50 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> + * Return: 0 on success, error code otherwise */ int
>> +__fpu_update_guest_features(struct fpu_guest *guest_fpu, u64 xcr0, u64
>> +xfd) {
>
> I think there would be one issue for the "host write on restore" case.
> The current QEMU based host restore uses the following sequence:
> 1) restore xsave
> 2) restore xcr0
> 3) restore XFD MSR

This needs to be fixed. Ordering clearly needs to be:

XFD, XCR0, XSTATE

> At the time of "1) restore xsave", KVM already needs fpstate expansion
> before restoring the xsave data.

> So the 2 APIs here might not be usable for this usage.
> Our current solution to fpstate expansion at KVM_SET_XSAVE (i.e. step 1) above) is:
>
> kvm_load_guest_fpu(vcpu);
> guest_fpu->realloc_request = realloc_request;
> kvm_put_guest_fpu(vcpu);
>
> "realloc_request" above is generated from the "xstate_header" received from userspace.

That's a horrible hack. Please fix the ordering in QEMU. Trying to
accomodate for nonsensical use cases in the kernel is just wrong.

That's like you expect the following to work:

u8 *p = mmap(NULL, 4096, ....);

p[8192] = x;

It rightfully explodes in your face and you can keep the pieces.

Having ordering constraints vs. these 3 involved parts is just sensible.

Thanks,

tglx

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-12-14 16:41    [W:0.137 / U:0.172 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site