Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] KVM: VMX: Cleanup VMX basic information defines and usages

[Chao Gao]

On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 01:34:48AM -0800, Xin Li wrote:
> 
>+#define VMX_BASIC_DUAL_MONITOR_TREATMENT	BIT_ULL(49)
>+#define VMX_BASIC_TRUE_CTLS			BIT_ULL(55)
>+
>+#define VMX_BASIC_FEATURES_MASK			\
>+	(VMX_BASIC_DUAL_MONITOR_TREATMENT |	\
>+	 VMX_BASIC_INOUT |			\
>+	 VMX_BASIC_TRUE_CTLS)
>+
>+#define VMX_BASIC_RESERVED_BITS			\
>+	(GENMASK_ULL(63, 56) | GENMASK_ULL(47, 45) | BIT_ULL(31))

When we add a new feature (e.g., in CET series, bit 56 is added), the above
two macros need to be modified.

Would it be better to use a macro for bits exempt from the bitwise check below
e.g.,

#define VMX_BASIC_MULTI_BITS_FEATURES_MASK

	(GENMASK_ULL(53, 50) | GENMASK_ULL(44, 32) | GENMASK_ULL(30, 0))

and do
	if (!is_bitwise_subset(vmx_basic, data,
			       ~VMX_BASIC_MULTI_BITS_FEATURES_MASK)

then we don't need to change the macro when adding new features.

>+
> static int vmx_restore_vmx_basic(struct vcpu_vmx *vmx, u64 data)
> {
>-	const u64 feature_and_reserved =
>-		/* feature (except bit 48; see below) */
>-		BIT_ULL(49) | BIT_ULL(54) | BIT_ULL(55) |
>-		/* reserved */
>-		BIT_ULL(31) | GENMASK_ULL(47, 45) | GENMASK_ULL(63, 56);
> 	u64 vmx_basic = vmcs_config.nested.basic;
> 
>-	if (!is_bitwise_subset(vmx_basic, data, feature_and_reserved))
>+	static_assert(!(VMX_BASIC_FEATURES_MASK & VMX_BASIC_RESERVED_BITS));
>+
>+	if (!is_bitwise_subset(vmx_basic, data,
>+			       VMX_BASIC_FEATURES_MASK | VMX_BASIC_RESERVED_BITS))
> 		return -EINVAL;
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * KVM does not emulate a version of VMX that constrains physical
> 	 * addresses of VMX structures (e.g. VMCS) to 32-bits.
> 	 */
>-	if (data & BIT_ULL(48))
>+	if (data & VMX_BASIC_32BIT_PHYS_ADDR_ONLY)
> 		return -EINVAL;

Side topic:

Actually, there is no need to handle bit 48 as a special case. If we add bit 48
to VMX_BASIC_FEATURES_MASK, the bitwise check will fail if bit 48 of @data is 1.