From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?windows-1252?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=E9?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/32] xen/x86: fix arch_set_info_guest for HVM guests Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:25:04 +0200 Message-ID: <55B0C100.6000308@citrix.com> References: <1435923310-9019-1-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com> <1435923310-9019-8-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com> <55A3E0F102000078000903B5@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ZIDgc-0006WJ-6U for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 23 Jul 2015 10:25:10 +0000 In-Reply-To: <55A3E0F102000078000903B5@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Andrew Cooper , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org El 13/07/15 a les 16.01, Jan Beulich ha escrit: >>>> On 03.07.15 at 13:34, wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c >> @@ -795,6 +795,15 @@ int arch_set_info_guest( >> c.nat->fs_base || c.nat->gs_base_user)) ) >> return -EINVAL; >> } >> + else if ( is_hvm_domain(d) ) >> + { >> + if ( c(ctrlreg[0]) || c(ctrlreg[1]) || c(ctrlreg[2]) || >> + c(ctrlreg[3]) || c(ctrlreg[4]) || c(ctrlreg[5]) || >> + c(ctrlreg[6]) || c(ctrlreg[7]) || c(ldt_base) || >> + c(ldt_ents) || c(kernel_ss) || c(kernel_sp) || >> + c(gdt_ents) ) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } > > In addition to what Andrew said - is the use of c() here really correct > considering > > compat = is_pv_32bit_domain(d); > > #define c(fld) (compat ? (c.cmp->fld) : (c.nat->fld)) > > near the beginning of the function? I've been thinking about this. Since HVM vCPUs are always started in 32bit mode, I would ideally like to use the vcpu_guest_context_x86_32_t struct to set the vCPU context. This means that for HVM guests "compat" should always be true. The problem is that inside of the guest there's no notion of vcpu_guest_context_x86_32_t or vcpu_guest_context_x86_64_t, there's only vcpu_guest_context, which defaults to the native bitness of the guest. So if your guest is running in 64bit mode vcpu_guest_context is aliased to vcpu_guest_context_x86_64_t by default. TBH I'm not sure about the best way to solve this. Should vcpu_guest_context_x86_32_t and vcpu_guest_context_x86_64_t be exposed to the guest like it's done for the tools? Roger.