On 14/08/19 09:34, lantianyu1...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Tianyu Lan <tianyu....@microsoft.com>
>
> The struct hv_vp_assist_page was defined incorrectly.
> The "vtl_control" should be u64[3], "nested_enlightenments
> _control" should be a u64 and there is 7 reserved bytes
> following "enlighten_vmentry". This patch is to fix it.
How did the assignment to vp_ap->current_nested_vmcs work then? Does
the guest simply not care?
Paolo
> Signed-off-by: Tianyu Lan <tianyu....@microsoft.com>
> --
> Change since v1:
> Move definition of struct hv_nested_enlightenments_control
> into this patch to fix offset issue.
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/hyperv-tlfs.h | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/hyperv-tlfs.h
> b/arch/x86/include/asm/hyperv-tlfs.h
> index af78cd72b8f3..cf0b2a04271d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/hyperv-tlfs.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/hyperv-tlfs.h
> @@ -514,14 +514,24 @@ struct hv_timer_message_payload {
> __u64 delivery_time; /* When the message was delivered */
> } __packed;
>
> +struct hv_nested_enlightenments_control {
> + struct {
> + __u32 directhypercall:1;
> + __u32 reserved:31;
> + } features;
> + struct {
> + __u32 reserved;
> + } hypercallControls;
> +} __packed;
> +
> /* Define virtual processor assist page structure. */
> struct hv_vp_assist_page {
> __u32 apic_assist;
> - __u32 reserved;
> - __u64 vtl_control[2];
> - __u64 nested_enlightenments_control[2];
> - __u32 enlighten_vmentry;
> - __u32 padding;
> + __u32 reserved1;
> + __u64 vtl_control[3];
> + struct hv_nested_enlightenments_control nested_control;
> + __u8 enlighten_vmentry;
> + __u8 reserved2[7];
> __u64 current_nested_vmcs;
> } __packed;
>
>
