On Tue, 2021-03-16 at 09:32 +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Hi Maxim,
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 12:10:20AM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > -static int (*const svm_exit_handlers[])(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) = {
> > +static int (*svm_exit_handlers[])(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) = {
>
> Can you keep this const and always set the necessary handlers? If
> exceptions are not intercepted they will not be used.
>
> > @@ -333,7 +334,9 @@ static inline void clr_exception_intercept(struct
> > vcpu_svm *svm, u32 bit)
> > struct vmcb *vmcb = svm->vmcb01.ptr;
> >
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(bit >= 32);
> > - vmcb_clr_intercept(&vmcb->control, INTERCEPT_EXCEPTION_OFFSET + bit);
> > +
> > + if (!((1 << bit) & debug_intercept_exceptions))
> > + vmcb_clr_intercept(&vmcb->control, INTERCEPT_EXCEPTION_OFFSET +
> > bit);
>
> This will break SEV-ES guests, as those will not cause an intercept but
> now start to get #VC exceptions on every other exception that is raised.
> SEV-ES guests are not prepared for that and will not even boot, so
> please don't enable this feature for them.
I agree but what is wrong with that?
This is a debug feature, and it only can be enabled by the root,
and so someone might actually want this case to happen
(e.g to see if a SEV guest can cope with extra #VC exceptions).
I have nothing against not allowing this for SEV-ES guests though.
What do you think?
Best regards,
Maxim Levitsky
