From: Peng Hao <flyingpeng@tencent.com>

Make sure nested_vmx_hardware_setup/unsetup() are called in pairs under
the same conditions.  Calling nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup() when nested
is false "works" right now because it only calls free_page() on zero-
initialized pointers, but it's possible that more code will be added to
nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup() in the future.

Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <flyingpeng@tencent.com>
---
 arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
index 75ed7d6f35cc..9fad3c73395a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
@@ -7852,7 +7852,7 @@ static __init int hardware_setup(void)
 	vmx_set_cpu_caps();
 
 	r = alloc_kvm_area();
-	if (r)
+	if (r && nested)
 		nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup();
 
 	kvm_set_posted_intr_wakeup_handler(pi_wakeup_handler);
-- 
2.27.0

Needs a space added as fixup.

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022, Peng Hao wrote:
> From: Peng Hao <flyingpeng@tencent.com>
> 
> Make sure nested_vmx_hardware_setup/unsetup() are called in pairs under
> the same conditions.  Calling nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup() when nested
> is false "works" right now because it only calls free_page() on zero-
> initialized pointers, but it's possible that more code will be added to
> nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup() in the future.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <flyingpeng@tencent.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> index 75ed7d6f35cc..9fad3c73395a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> @@ -7852,7 +7852,7 @@ static __init int hardware_setup(void)
>  	vmx_set_cpu_caps();
>  
>  	r = alloc_kvm_area();
> -	if (r)
> +	if (r && nested)
>  		nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup();
>  
>  	kvm_set_posted_intr_wakeup_handler(pi_wakeup_handler);
> -- 
> 2.27.0
> 

On 2/22/22 11:40, Peng Hao wrote:
> From: Peng Hao <flyingpeng@tencent.com>
> 
> Make sure nested_vmx_hardware_setup/unsetup() are called in pairs under
> the same conditions.  Calling nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup() when nested
> is false "works" right now because it only calls free_page() on zero-
> initialized pointers, but it's possible that more code will be added to
> nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup() in the future.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <flyingpeng@tencent.com>
> ---
>   arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> index 75ed7d6f35cc..9fad3c73395a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c
> @@ -7852,7 +7852,7 @@ static __init int hardware_setup(void)
>   	vmx_set_cpu_caps();
>   
>   	r = alloc_kvm_area();
> -	if (r)
> +	if (r && nested)
>   		nested_vmx_hardware_unsetup();
>   
>   	kvm_set_posted_intr_wakeup_handler(pi_wakeup_handler);

Queued, thanks.

Paolo