lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:33:49 +0800
From:	Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@...il.com>
To:	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	"Lan, Tianyu" <tianyu.lan@...el.com>,
	Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@....de>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] KVM: x86: add KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API

On 2016/7/11 17:17, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 11/07/2016 10:56, Yang Zhang wrote:
>> On 2016/7/11 15:44, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/07/2016 08:06, Yang Zhang wrote:
>>>>> Changes to MSI addresses follow the format used by interrupt remapping
>>>>> unit.
>>>>> The upper address word, that used to be 0, contains upper 24 bits of
>>>>> the LAPIC
>>>>> address in its upper 24 bits.  Lower 8 bits are reserved as 0.
>>>>> Using the upper address word is not backward-compatible either as we
>>>>> didn't
>>>>> check that userspace zeroed the word.  Reserved bits are still not
>>>>> explicitly
>>>>
>>>> Does this means we cannot migrate the VM from KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API enabled
>>>> host to the disable host even VM doesn't have more than 255 VCPUs?
>>>
>>> Yes, but that's why KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API is enabled manually.  The idea is
>>> that QEMU will not use KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API except on the newest machine
>>> type.
>>
>> Thanks for confirmation. And when the KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API will be enabled
>> in Qemu?
>
> It could be 2.7 or 2.8.
>
>>>
>>> If interrupt remapping is on, KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API is needed even with 8
>>> VCPUs, I think.  Otherwise KVM will believe that 0xff is "broadcast"
>>> rather than "cluster 0, CPUs 0-7".
>>
>> If interrupt remapping is using, what 0xff means is relying on which
>> mode the destination CPU is in. I think there is no KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API
>> needed since interrupt remapping table gives all the information.
>
> If you have EIM 0xff never means broadcast, but KVM sees a 0xff in the
> interrupt route or KVM_SIGNAL_MSI argument and translates it into a
> broadcast.

I see your point. I thought there would be a new irq router(like 
KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_IR) to handle all interrupts after turn on IR and 
KVM_CAP_X2APIC_API would be dropped. So we will continue to use 
KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_IRQCHIP and KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_MSI for interrupt from IR, 
right?

-- 
best regards
yang

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ