On Fri, 2017-09-29 at 16:56 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 29/09/17 16:01, George Dunlap wrote:
> > @@ -4203,13 +4197,17 @@ static void lbr_fixup(void)
> > bdw_erratum_bdf14_fixup();
> > }
> >
> > -void vmx_vmenter_helper(const struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
> > +int
On 29/09/17 16:01, George Dunlap wrote:
> @@ -4203,13 +4197,17 @@ static void lbr_fixup(void)
> bdw_erratum_bdf14_fixup();
> }
>
> -void vmx_vmenter_helper(const struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
> +int vmx_vmenter_helper(const struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
What are the semantics of this
At the moment, the shadow EPTP value is written unconditionally in
ept_handle_violation().
Instead, write the value on vmentry to the guest; but only write it if
the value needs updating.
To detect this, add a flag to the nestedvcpu struct, stale_np2m, to
indicate when such an action is
