[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86: clear CPUID output of leaf 0xd for Dom0 when xsave is disabled
>>> On 19.05.11 at 18:08, "Huang2, Wei" <Wei.Huang2@xxxxxxx> wrote: > That is right. Could you slip it into your patch and I can sign it off? Or I > can crank up one. Keir hasn't put your patch into tree yet. I would specifically want this change to be separate from the one I did. Jan > Thanks, > -Wei > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 11:06 AM > To: Huang2, Wei > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86: clear CPUID output of leaf 0xd for Dom0 > when xsave is disabled > >>>> On 19.05.11 at 17:34, Wei Huang <wei.huang2@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> I misunderstood your email then. Doesn't your patch already achieve this >> objective? We didn't check sub-leaf ID (ECX) in switch-case statement. >> So all sub-leaves will be cleaned out by your patch. > > Exactly - all of them. However, with LWP currently supported for HVM > guests only, the respective leaf should be cleared for Dom0 (while not > clearing the others). > > Jan > >> -Wei >> >> On 05/19/2011 01:47 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 18.05.11 at 23:01, Wei Huang<wei.huang2@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> I tested cpuid on a real hardware. If software wants, reading all >>>> sub-leaves are allowed even on hardware which doesn't support XSAVE. The >>>> instruction just returns 0. So I don't think we need to zap output for >>>> sub-leaves> 1. >>> "Returning zero" is what "zapping" means to me. Returning non-zero >>> possibly mis-guiding OSes (just as is the case with the xsaveopt >>> feature flag in Linux) is what I want to avoid. >>> >>> Jan >>> >>>> 0x0000000c 0x00: eax=0x00000000 ebx=0x00000000 ecx=0x00000000 >>>> edx=0x00000000 >>>> 0x0000000d 0x00: eax=0x00000003 ebx=0x00000240 ecx=0x00000240 >>>> edx=0x00000000 >>>> 0x0000000d 0x02: eax=0x00000000 ebx=0x00000000 ecx=0x00000000 >>>> edx=0x00000000 >>>> 0x0000000d 0x3e: eax=0x00000000 ebx=0x00000000 ecx=0x00000000 >>>> edx=0x00000000 >>>> >>>> On 05/18/2011 04:53 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> Linux starting with 2.6.36 uses the XSAVEOPT instruction and has >>>>> certain code paths that look only at the feature bit reported through >>>>> CPUID leaf 0xd sub-leaf 1 (i.e. without qualifying the check with one >>>>> evaluating leaf 4 output). Consequently the hypervisor ought to mimic >>>>> actual hardware in clearing leaf 0xd output when not supporting xsave. >>>>> >>>>> (Note that this is only a minimal fix. It may be necessary, e.g. for >>>>> LWP, to also adjust sub-leaf 0's bit masks and perhaps zap output of >>>>> sub-leaves> 1 when the respective bit in sub-leaf 0 is getting >>>>> cleared.) >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich<jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c >>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c >>>>> @@ -836,6 +836,10 @@ static void pv_cpuid(struct cpu_user_reg >>>>> __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_NODEID_MSR % 32,&c); >>>>> __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_TOPOEXT % 32,&c); >>>>> break; >>>>> + case 0xd: /* XSAVE */ >>>>> + if ( xsave_enabled(current) ) >>>>> + break; >>>>> + /* fall through */ >>>>> case 5: /* MONITOR/MWAIT */ >>>>> case 0xa: /* Architectural Performance Monitor Features */ >>>>> case 0x8000000a: /* SVM revision and features */ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |