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]
Message-ID: <49FDCD7C.7070605@redhat.com>
Date:	Sun, 03 May 2009 19:59:40 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davidel@...ilserver.org
Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v3 2/2] kvm: add support for irqfd via	eventfd-notification
 interface

Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 02:33:34PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>   
>> This allows an eventfd to be registered as an irq source with a guest.  Any
>> signaling operation on the eventfd (via userspace or kernel) will inject
>> the registered GSI at the next available window.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
>>     
>
> If we ever want to use this with e.g. MSI-X emulation in guest, and want
> to be stricly compliant to MSI-X, we'll need a way for guest to mask
> interrupts, and for host to report that a masked interrupt is pending.
> Ideally, all this will be doable with a couple of mmapped pages to avoid
> vmexits/system calls.
>
>   

We could do this in two ways:

- move msix entry emulation into the kernel
- require the device to support replacing its irqfd, and juggle it like so:
   - guest disables msi
       - replace device model fd with eventfd belonging to us
       - when the device fires its eventfd, set the irq pending bit
   - guest enables msi
        - if the pending bit is set, fire the interrupt?
        - replace device model fd with the real irqfd

I'm leaning towards the latter, though it's not an easy call.

>> +static void
>> +irqfd_inject(struct work_struct *work)
>> +{
>> +	struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(work, struct _irqfd, work);
>> +	struct kvm *kvm = irqfd->kvm;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
>> +	kvm_set_irq(kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, irqfd->gsi, 1);
>> +	kvm_set_irq(kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, irqfd->gsi, 0);
>> +	mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
>>     
>
> This will do weird stuff (deliver the irq twice) if the irq is
> MSI/MSI-X. I know this was discussed already and is a temporary
> shortcut, but maybe add a comment that we really want kvm_toggle_irq,
> so that we won't forget?
>   

If so, that's a bug.  MSI should ignore kvm_set_irq(..., 0).

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ