From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc(a)google.com>
Since VMX and SVM both would never update the control bits if exits
are disable after vCPUs are created, only allow setting exits
disable flag before vCPU creation.
Fixes: 4d5422cea3b6 ("KVM: X86: Provide a capability to disable MWAIT intercepts")
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc(a)google.com>
Signed-off-by: Kechen Lu <kechenl(a)nvidia.com>
Cc: stable(a)vger.kernel.org
---
Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst | 1 +
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 6 ++++++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
index 9807b05a1b57..fb0fcc566d5a 100644
--- a/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
+++ b/Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst
@@ -7087,6 +7087,7 @@ branch to guests' 0x200 interrupt vector.
:Architectures: x86
:Parameters: args[0] defines which exits are disabled
:Returns: 0 on success, -EINVAL when args[0] contains invalid exits
+ or if any vCPU has already been created
Valid bits in args[0] are::
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index da4bbd043a7b..c8ae9c4f9f08 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -6227,6 +6227,10 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm,
if (cap->args[0] & ~KVM_X86_DISABLE_VALID_EXITS)
break;
+ mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
+ if (kvm->created_vcpus)
+ goto disable_exits_unlock;
+
if ((cap->args[0] & KVM_X86_DISABLE_EXITS_MWAIT) &&
kvm_can_mwait_in_guest())
kvm->arch.mwait_in_guest = true;
@@ -6237,6 +6241,8 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm,
if (cap->args[0] & KVM_X86_DISABLE_EXITS_CSTATE)
kvm->arch.cstate_in_guest = true;
r = 0;
+disable_exits_unlock:
+ mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
break;
case KVM_CAP_MSR_PLATFORM_INFO:
kvm->arch.guest_can_read_msr_platform_info = cap->args[0];
--
2.34.1
Hi,
Dig a final round of digging, and found two sets of missing backports:
1) File position fixes
2) fsnotify fix (original is in stable, not the fixup)
With these, I've verified that 5.10-stable and 5.15-stable both fully
pass the liburing regression suite.
Please queue up for 5.10-stable and 5.15-stable, thanks!
--
Jens Axboe
Hi,
Noticed one more missing patch, here's a backport that applies to both
the 5.10 and 5.15 stable branches. Please apply to both of them, thanks!
--
Jens Axboe
Hi,
Same series as I just sent for 5.15-stable, except 5.10-stable already
has the three wakeup patches from that series, and two patches were
missing from 5.10-stable that got auto-picked for 5.15-stable. Not
quite sure why, as they apply directly... Possibly because they
coincided with the move to the io_uring/ directory.
In fact the rest are identical, they apply directly to 5.10-stable.
Yay for a unified backport base! These have been runtime tested on
top of the current 5.10-stable tree, 5.10.164.
Please apply for the next 5.10-stable release, thanks!
--
Jens Axboe
I have a transaction which is of mutual benefits and I would like to share with you. if interested for more information please get back to me via my email: david.murray606(a)gmail.com
Regards.
David Murray
--
Este mensaje ha sido analizado por MailScanner
en busca de virus y otros contenidos peligrosos,
y se considera que está limpio.
I have a transaction which is of mutual benefits and I would like to share with you. if interested for more information please get back to me via my email: david.murray606(a)gmail.com
Regards.
David Murray
--
Este mensaje ha sido analizado por MailScanner
en busca de virus y otros contenidos peligrosos,
y se considera que está limpio.