On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 10:49 AM KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
@@ -7410,19 +7410,17 @@ static int handle_vmon(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
return kvm_skip_emulated_instruction(vcpu);
}
- page = kvm_vcpu_gpa_to_page(vcpu, vmptr);
- if (is_error_page(page)) {
+ if (!kvm_vcpu_gpa_to_host_mapping(vcpu, vmptr, &mapping, true)) {
nested_vmx_failInvalid(vcpu);
return kvm_skip_emulated_instruction(vcpu);
}
- if (*(u32 *)kmap(page) != VMCS12_REVISION) {
- kunmap(page);
- kvm_release_page_clean(page);
+ if (*(u32 *)mapping.kaddr != VMCS12_REVISION) {
+ kvm_release_host_mapping(&mapping, false);
nested_vmx_failInvalid(vcpu);
return kvm_skip_emulated_instruction(vcpu);
}
- kunmap(page);
- kvm_release_page_clean(page);
+
+ kvm_release_host_mapping(&mapping, false);
Why go through this explicit mapping/release dance? Why not just:
uint32_t revision;
...
if (kvm_read_guest(vcpu->kvm, vmptr, &revision, sizeof(revision)) ||
revision != VMCS12_REVISION) {
nested_vmx_failInvalid(vcpu);
return kvm_skip_emulated_instruction(vcpu);
}