[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA9cT617t8JqOXtuO-wQ5xg5T3Sw_DUHB1fpPD6g3SSNaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 18:04:30 +0100
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@...aro.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>,
"kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>,
arm-mail-list <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
kvm-devel <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: KVM: export current vcpu->pause state via pseudo regs
On 31 July 2014 17:57, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
> Il 09/07/2014 15:55, Alex Bennée ha scritto:
>> To cleanly restore an SMP VM we need to ensure that the current pause
>> state of each vcpu is correctly recorded. Things could get confused if
>> the CPU starts running after migration restore completes when it was
>> paused before it state was captured.
>>
>> I've done this by exposing a register (currently only 1 bit used) via
>> the GET/SET_ONE_REG logic to pass the state between KVM and the VM
>> controller (e.g. QEMU).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 8 +++++
>> arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> 2 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Since it's a pseudo register anyway, would it make sense to use the
> existing KVM_GET/SET_MP_STATE ioctl interface?
That appears to be an x86-specific thing relating to
IRQ chips.
> How is this represented within QEMU in TCG mode?
We don't implement it in TCG yet; Rob Herring has posted
patches but they had a few minor issues (didn't compile
on non-Linux hosts). The answer will be 'in a "bool powered_off"
flag in struct ARMCPU'.
> Also, how is KVM/ARM
> representing (and passing to QEMU) the halted state of the
> VCPU?
We don't. In ARM the equivalent of x86 HLT (which is
WFI, wait-for-interrupt) is allowed to resume at any time.
So we don't need to care about saving and restoring
whether we were sat in a WFI at point of migration.
thanks
-- PMM
--
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