> On 27. Nov 2017, at 14:09, Steve Rutherford <srutherf...@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:58 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 26/11/2017 17:41, Filippo Sironi wrote:
>>> ... that the guest should see.
>>> Guest operating systems may check the microcode version to decide whether
>>> to disable certain features that are known to be buggy up to certain
>>> microcode versions. Address the issue by making the microcode version
>>> that the guest should see settable.
>>> The rationale for having userspace specifying the microcode version, rather
>>> than having the kernel picking it, is to ensure consistency for
>>> live-migrated
>>> instances; we don't want them to see a microcode version increase without a
>>> reset.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Filippo Sironi <sir...@amazon.de>
>>> ---
>>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 3 +++
>>> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> index 925c3e29cad3..741588f27ebc 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>>> @@ -4033,6 +4033,29 @@ long kvm_arch_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp,
>>> } u;
>>>
>>> switch (ioctl) {
>>> + case KVM_GET_MICROCODE_VERSION: {
>>> + r = -EFAULT;
>>> + if (copy_to_user(argp,
>>> + &kvm->arch.microcode_version,
>>> + sizeof(kvm->arch.microcode_version)))
>>> + goto out;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + case KVM_SET_MICROCODE_VERSION: {
>>> + u32 microcode_version;
>>> +
>>> + r = -EFAULT;
>>> + if (copy_from_user(µcode_version,
>>> + argp,
>>> + sizeof(microcode_version)))
>>> + goto out;
>>> + r = -EINVAL;
>>> + if (!microcode_version)
>>> + goto out;
>>> + kvm->arch.microcode_version = microcode_version;
>>> + r = 0;
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>
>> Also, there's no need to define new ioctls, instead you can just place
>> it in the vcpu and use KVM_GET_MSR/KVM_SET_MSR. I'd agree that's
>> slightly less polished, but it matches what we do already for e.g.
>> nested VMX model specific registers. And it spares you for writing the
>> documentation that you didn't include in this patch. :)
>>
>> Paolo
>
> This feels good time to mention Peter Hornyack's old MSR KVM_EXIT
> patches. With something like them, there would be no need to push this
> into the kernel at all.
That's one of the solution we discussed internally (at Amazon) but we
didn't pursue yet given the need to release a quick fix for customers.
I was thinking about implementing a mechanism to selectively go back to
userspace to emulate MSRs; something that's not limited to KVM unhandled
MSRs but that instead could even override KVM's handling.
Filippo
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
Ust-ID: DE289237879
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B
