lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Oct]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Do not expose the host value of CPUID.8000001EH
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/25/22 18:46, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 22, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > Several fields of CPUID.8000001EH (ExtendedApicId in EAX[31:0],
> > > CoreId in EBX[7:0], NodeId in ECX[7:0]) vary on each processor,
> > > and it is simply impossible to fit the right values in the
> > > KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID API, in such a way that they can be
> > > passed to KVM_SET_CPUID2.
> >
> > The same is true for 0xb and 0x1f, why delete 0x8000001e but keep those? I agree
> > that KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID can't get this right, but KVM can at least be
> > consistent with itself.
>
> 0xb and 0x1f are already special cased because EDX is set to the X2APIC id.
> KVM knows how to do that unlike the NodeId and CoreId.

But KVM doesn't properly support 0xB/0x1F. E.g. if usersepace regurgitates
KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID back into KVM_SET_CPUID2, all vCPUs will observe the same
x2APIC ID in EDX, and it will be a host x2APIC ID to boot.

KVM only handles the where userspace provides 0xB.1 (or 0x1F.1), the guest performs
CPUID with ECX>1, _and_ userspace doesn't provide the exact CPUID entry.

I suppose one could argue that KVM needs to communicate to userspace that KVM
emulates the edge case behavior of CPUID 0xB and 0x1F, but I would argue that KVM
communicates that by announcing a max basic leaf >= 0xB/0x1F.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-10-25 23:27    [W:0.131 / U:0.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site