[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/2] KVM: VMX: Don't advertise EPT switching if EPT itself is not exposed
On 17/10/2017 19:29, Jim Mattson wrote:
> Following the same line of reasoning, what if
> vmx->nested.nested_vmx_secondary_ctls_high is 0 after clearing
> SECONDARY_EXEC_ENABLE_VMFUNC? Does it make sense to report
> CPU_BASED_ACTIVATE_SECONDARY_CONTROLS if we don't actually support any
> of the secondary controls?

All-zero is a valid value for secondary controls, so I think yes. Besides:

1) userspace can always get into a situation where there are no valid
secondary controls but processor-based execution controls have bit 31 as

2) I doubt that vmfunc can be the one bit that causes
nested_vmx_secondary_ctls_high to become zero :)


 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-17 19:36    [W:0.074 / U:4.128 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site