linux-kernel - RE: [v3 25/26] KVM: Suppress posted-interrupt when 'SN' is set

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Message-ID: <E959C4978C3B6342920538CF579893F00230ABEB@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 19 Dec 2014 02:58:01 +0000
From:	"Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>
To:	"Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@...el.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [v3 25/26] KVM: Suppress posted-interrupt when 'SN' is set

> -----Original Message-----
> From: iommu-bounces@...ts.linux-foundation.org
> [mailto:iommu-bounces@...ts.linux-foundation.org] On Behalf Of Zhang, Yang Z
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 11:10 PM
> To: Paolo Bonzini; kvm@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> kvm@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [v3 25/26] KVM: Suppress posted-interrupt when 'SN' is set
> 
> Paolo Bonzini wrote on 2014-12-18:
> >
> >
> > On 18/12/2014 04:14, Wu, Feng wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org wrote on
> mailto:linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Paolo:
> >>> x86@...nel.org; Gleb Natapov; Paolo Bonzini; dwmw2@...radead.org;
> >>> joro-zLv9SwRftAIdnm+yROfE0A@...lic.gmane.org; Alex Williamson;
> >>> joro-zLv9SwRftAIdnm+Jiang
> >>> Liu
> >>> Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org;
> >>> linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@...lic.gmane.org; KVM list;
> >>> Eric Auger
> >>> Subject: Re: [v3 25/26] KVM: Suppress posted-interrupt when 'SN' is
> >>> set
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 12/12/2014 16:14, Feng Wu wrote:
> >>>> Currently, we don't support urgent interrupt, all interrupts are
> >>>> recognized as non-urgent interrupt, so we cannot send
> >>>> posted-interrupt when 'SN' is set.
> >>>
> >>> Can this happen?  If the vcpu is in guest mode, it cannot have been
> >>> scheduled out, and that's the only case when SN is set.
> >>>
> >>> Paolo
> >>
> >> Currently, the only place where SN is set is vCPU is preempted and
> 
> If the vCPU is preempted, shouldn't the subsequent be ignored? What happens
> if a PI is occurs when vCPU is preempted?

If a vCPU is preempted, the 'SN' bit is set, the subsequent interrupts are
suppressed for posting.

Thanks,
Feng

> 
> >> waiting for the next scheduling in the runqueue. But I am not sure
> >> whether we need to set SN for other purpose in future. Adding SN
> >> checking here is just to follow the Spec. non-urgent interrupts are
> >> suppressed
> > when SN is set.
> >
> > I would change that to a WARN_ON_ONCE then.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Yang
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> iommu mailing list
> iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
--
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/

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