Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 19.08.2013 16:31, schrieb Liu, Jinsong: >> Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> >>> The patch looks good. Please repost it with checkpatch.pl failures >>> fixed. >>> >>> Paolo >> >> Thanks Stefan and Paolo! Updated patch attached. >> >> Regards, >> Jinsong >> >> =============== >> From a0ddf948d40e42de862543157a5668a1c12faae6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 >> 2001 >> From: Liu Jinsong <jinsong....@intel.com> >> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 09:33:30 +0800 >> Subject: [PATCH] qemu-kvm bugfix for IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL >> >> This patch is to fix the bug >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu-kvm/+bug/1207623 >> >> IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL is pointless if not expose VMX or SMX bits to >> cpuid.1.ecx of vcpu. Current qemu-kvm will error return when >> kvm_put_msrs >> or kvm_get_msrs. >> >> Signed-off-by: Liu Jinsong <jinsong....@intel.com> > > Jinsong, if this is for upstream QEMU, then the commit message needs > some small improvements: > > qemu-kvm is no longer maintained since 1.3 so it should not be > occurring any more.
Thanks Andreas! This patch is for qemu-kvm. Per my understanding, there are some patches firstly checked in qemu-kvm uq/master branch. This patch is to fix c/s 0779caeb1a17f4d3ed14e2925b36ba09b084fb7b of qemu-kvm uq/master branch (which is to co-work w/ kvm IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL, and currently not yet in upstream qemu). This patch is used to fix the bug introduced by 0779caeb1a17f4d3ed14e2925b36ba09b084fb7b of qemu-kvm uq/master branch. The bug is reported as https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu-kvm/+bug/1207623 https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1213797 Anything I misunderstand, for upstream qemu and qemu-kvm? > > Please use a prefix of "target-i386: " (the directory name) to signal > where you are changing code, i.e. x86 only. > > "bugfix" is not a very telling description of what a patch is doing. > > (Up to Paolo and Gleb whether they'll fix it or whether they require a > resend.) > > Also please use git-send-email to submit patches and use "PATCH v2" > etc. for submission as top-level patch: > http://wiki.qemu.org/Contribute/SubmitAPatch Thanks, will update per your comments :) > > One question inline... > >> --- >> target-i386/kvm.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-- >> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/target-i386/kvm.c b/target-i386/kvm.c >> index 84ac00a..5adeb03 100644 >> --- a/target-i386/kvm.c >> +++ b/target-i386/kvm.c >> @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ static bool has_msr_star; >> static bool has_msr_hsave_pa; >> static bool has_msr_tsc_adjust; >> static bool has_msr_tsc_deadline; >> +static bool has_msr_feature_control; >> static bool has_msr_async_pf_en; >> static bool has_msr_pv_eoi_en; >> static bool has_msr_misc_enable; >> @@ -644,6 +645,12 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vcpu(CPUState *cs) >> >> qemu_add_vm_change_state_handler(cpu_update_state, env); >> >> + c = cpuid_find_entry(&cpuid_data.cpuid, 1, 0); + if (c) { >> + has_msr_feature_control = !!(c->ecx & CPUID_EXT_VMX) || >> + !!(c->ecx & CPUID_EXT_SMX); + } >> + >> cpuid_data.cpuid.padding = 0; >> r = kvm_vcpu_ioctl(cs, KVM_SET_CPUID2, &cpuid_data); if >> (r) { @@ -1121,7 +1128,10 @@ static int kvm_put_msrs(X86CPU *cpu, >> int level) if (hyperv_vapic_recommended()) { >> kvm_msr_entry_set(&msrs[n++], >> HV_X64_MSR_APIC_ASSIST_PAGE, 0); } - >> kvm_msr_entry_set(&msrs[n++], MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL, >> env->msr_ia32_feature_control); + if >> (has_msr_feature_control) { + >> kvm_msr_entry_set(&msrs[n++], MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL, + >> env->msr_ia32_feature_control); + } } if (env->mcg_cap) { >> int i; >> @@ -1346,7 +1356,9 @@ static int kvm_get_msrs(X86CPU *cpu) >> if (has_msr_misc_enable) { >> msrs[n++].index = MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE; >> } >> - msrs[n++].index = MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL; >> + if (has_msr_feature_control) { >> + msrs[n++].index = MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL; + } >> >> if (!env->tsc_valid) { >> msrs[n++].index = MSR_IA32_TSC; >> @@ -1447,6 +1459,7 @@ static int kvm_get_msrs(X86CPU *cpu) >> break; case MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL: >> env->msr_ia32_feature_control = msrs[i].data; >> + break; > > Was the fallthrough previously intended? Or is this a second, > unmentioned bugfix? Hmm, it just add 'break' I think patch 0779caeb1a17f4d3ed14e2925b36ba09b084fb7b forget. Thanks, Jinsong > > Regards, > Andreas > >> default: >> if (msrs[i].index >= MSR_MC0_CTL && >> msrs[i].index < MSR_MC0_CTL + (env->mcg_cap & 0xff) >> * 4) {
