[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5369F5B0.7050307@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 10:58:24 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Hu Yaohui <loki2441@...il.com>, Abel Gordon <abel@...atoscale.com>
CC: Bandan Das <bsd@...hat.com>, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...atoscale.com>
Subject: Re: KVM Nested L2 guest startup problems
Il 04/05/2014 18:33, Hu Yaohui ha scritto:
>> I experienced a similar problem that was related to nested code
>> having some bugs related to apicv and other new vmx features.
>>
>> For example, the code enabled posted interrupts to run L2 even when the
>> feature was not exposed to L1 and L1 didn't use it.
>>
>> Try changing prepare_vmcs02 to force disabling posted_interrupts,
>> code should looks like:
>>
>> ....
>> ....
>> exec_control = vmcs12->pin_based_vm_exec_control;
>> exec_control |= vmcs_config.pin_based_exec_ctrl;
>> exec_control &= ~(PIN_BASED_VMX_PREEMPTION_TIMER|PIN_BASED_POSTED_INTR);
>> vmcs_write32(PIN_BASED_VM_EXEC_CONTROL, exec_control);
>> ....
>> ...
>>
>> and also
>>
>> ...
>> ...
>> exec_control &= ~(SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUALIZE_APIC_ACCESSES |
>> SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUAL_INTR_DELIVERY |
>> SECONDARY_EXEC_APIC_REGISTER_VIRT |
>> SECONDARY_EXEC_PAUSE_LOOP_EXITING);
PLE should be left enabled, I think.
Apart from that, I'll change the suggestion into a patch.
Thanks!
Paolo
--
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