WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH 01/13] Nested Virtualization: tools

Dong, Eddie wrote:
Andre Przywara wrote:
Dong, Eddie wrote:
Dong, Eddie wrote:
# HG changeset patch
# User cegger
# Date 1283345869 -7200
tools: Add nestedhvm guest config option

diff -r 80ef08613ec2 -r ecec3d163efa tools/libxc/xc_cpuid_x86.c
--- a/tools/libxc/xc_cpuid_x86.c
+++ b/tools/libxc/xc_cpuid_x86.c
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
 #define set_bit(idx, dst)   ((dst) |= (1u << ((idx) & 31)))

 #define DEF_MAX_BASE 0x0000000du
-#define DEF_MAX_EXT  0x80000008u
+#define DEF_MAX_EXT  0x8000000au
How can this make Intel CPU happy?
You may refer to my previous comments in V2.
Correct me if I am wrong, but this is only a max boundary:
tools/libxc/xc_cpuid_x86.c:234
     case 0x80000000:
         if ( regs[0] > DEF_MAX_EXT )
             regs[0] = DEF_MAX_EXT;
         break;
So if an Intel CPU returns 0x80000008 here, this will be in the
regs[0] field and thus any higher value in DEF_MAX_EXT does not
affect the guest's CPUID response.
So as long as Intel CPUs don't return higher values which don't match
the AMD assignment (which is extremely unlikely), extending
DEF_MAX_EXT is fine.

But it is called as MAX_EXT and will cause some unreasonable setup of leaves.
Where? If DEF_MAX_EXT would be 0x8FFFFFFF, CPUID would still return 0x80000008 on Intel CPUs. I don't see any leaves setup because of a changed DEF_MAX_EXT value. CPUID will just return the smaller value of (DEF_MAX_EXT,native CPUID), any leafs beyond the value will not be populated in xc_cpuid_apply_policy() and thus will not appear in the HV's struct domain->arch.cpuids array used for delivering CPUID results to guests.


May you split the MACRO to _AMD & _INTEL, or a dynamic variable depending on CPU brand like Keir suggested?
I guess that is not needed. The leaf is properly handled in the {amd,intel}_xc_cpuid_policy() filters, which will only be called on the respective CPUs.

Regards,
Andre.

--
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 448-3567-12


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel