Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpuid: Hide VT-x/SVM from HVM-based control domains

2017-01-24 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 24/01/17 15:41, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 08:10:56AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 24.01.17 at 15:38, wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 07:40:53PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: The VT-x/SVM features are hidden from PV dom0 by the pv_featureset[] upper mask,

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpuid: Hide VT-x/SVM from HVM-based control domains

2017-01-24 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 08:10:56AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 24.01.17 at 15:38, wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 07:40:53PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: > >> The VT-x/SVM features are hidden from PV dom0 by the pv_featureset[] upper > >> mask, but nothing thusfar has prevented the featur

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpuid: Hide VT-x/SVM from HVM-based control domains

2017-01-24 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 24.01.17 at 15:38, wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 07:40:53PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> The VT-x/SVM features are hidden from PV dom0 by the pv_featureset[] upper >> mask, but nothing thusfar has prevented the features being visible in >> HVM-based control domains (where there is no t

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpuid: Hide VT-x/SVM from HVM-based control domains

2017-01-24 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 07:40:53PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: > The VT-x/SVM features are hidden from PV dom0 by the pv_featureset[] upper > mask, but nothing thusfar has prevented the features being visible in > HVM-based control domains (where there is no toolstack decision to hide the > feature

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpuid: Hide VT-x/SVM from HVM-based control domains

2017-01-20 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 18.01.17 at 20:40, wrote: > The VT-x/SVM features are hidden from PV dom0 by the pv_featureset[] upper > mask, but nothing thusfar has prevented the features being visible in > HVM-based control domains (where there is no toolstack decision to hide the > features). > > As a side effect of

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpuid: Hide VT-x/SVM from HVM-based control domains

2017-01-19 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 19/01/17 03:56, Doug Goldstein wrote: > On 1/18/17 2:40 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> The VT-x/SVM features are hidden from PV dom0 by the pv_featureset[] upper >> mask, but nothing thusfar has prevented the features being visible in > thus far? Could be the difference between British English and

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpuid: Hide VT-x/SVM from HVM-based control domains

2017-01-18 Thread Doug Goldstein
On 1/18/17 2:40 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > The VT-x/SVM features are hidden from PV dom0 by the pv_featureset[] upper > mask, but nothing thusfar has prevented the features being visible in thus far? Could be the difference between British English and American English. > HVM-based control domains

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpuid: Hide VT-x/SVM from HVM-based control domains

2017-01-18 Thread Andrew Cooper
The VT-x/SVM features are hidden from PV dom0 by the pv_featureset[] upper mask, but nothing thusfar has prevented the features being visible in HVM-based control domains (where there is no toolstack decision to hide the features). As a side effect of calling nestedhvm_enabled() earlier during dom