| Message ID | 20170223094117.7212-3-haozhong.zhang@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
>>> On 23.02.17 at 10:41, <haozhong.zhang@intel.com> wrote: > The current implementation of nested VMX cannot work without HAP. Of course the better route would be to fix the actual problem, the more that - according to other feedback you've got elsewhere - this apparently is a regression. Nevertheless I can see you perhaps not having the time to do so, so as a band aid it's likely fine. However ... > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > @@ -4123,7 +4123,7 @@ static int hvmop_set_param( > * Remove the check below once we have > * shadow-on-shadow. > */ > - if ( cpu_has_svm && !paging_mode_hap(d) && a.value ) > + if ( (cpu_has_svm || cpu_has_vmx) && !paging_mode_hap(d) && a.value ) ... you want to simply drop the cpu_has_svm check here instead of adding to it, as with neither SVM nor VMX available execution will never come here. Jan
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c index 6621d62..b8db808 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c @@ -4123,7 +4123,7 @@ static int hvmop_set_param( * Remove the check below once we have * shadow-on-shadow. */ - if ( cpu_has_svm && !paging_mode_hap(d) && a.value ) + if ( (cpu_has_svm || cpu_has_vmx) && !paging_mode_hap(d) && a.value ) rc = -EINVAL; if ( a.value && d->arch.hvm_domain.params[HVM_PARAM_ALTP2M] )
The current implementation of nested VMX cannot work without HAP. Signed-off-by: Haozhong Zhang <haozhong.zhang@intel.com> --- Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> --- xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)