RE: [PATCH v2 1/5] mmu: extend the is_present check to 32 bits

[Li, Liang Z]

Intel SDM doesn't describe whether the A bit will be set or not when CPU accesses  a no present EPT page table entry? 
even this patch works for the current CPU, it's not good to make such an assumption. 

Should we revert it?

Thanks!
Liang


> -----Original Message-----
> From: kvm-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:kvm-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Bandan Das
> Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 6:19 AM
> To: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx; guangrong.xiao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> kernellwp@xxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [PATCH v2 1/5] mmu: extend the is_present check to 32 bits
> 
> This is safe because this function is called on host controlled page table and
> non-present/non-MMIO sptes never use bits 1..31. For the EPT case, this
> ensures that cases where only the execute bit is set is marked valid.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bandan Das <bsd@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c index
> def97b3..87b62dc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> @@ -304,7 +304,7 @@ static int is_nx(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> 
>  static int is_shadow_present_pte(u64 pte)  {
> -	return pte & PT_PRESENT_MASK && !is_mmio_spte(pte);
> +	return (pte & 0xFFFFFFFFull) && !is_mmio_spte(pte);
>  }
> 
>  static int is_large_pte(u64 pte)
> --
> 2.5.5
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of
> a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at
> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html