[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACzj_yUn8yMY1iW2Umd_nYX29jw1vyuPd=m+jfx55ZwXXUPTBw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 13:54:30 +0800
From: Wincy Van <fanwenyi0529@...il.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: "gleb@...nel.org" <gleb@...nel.org>,
"Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@...el.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...ux.intel.com>,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] KVM: nVMX: Enable nested posted interrupt processing.
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 24/01/2015 11:24, Wincy Van wrote:
>> if (!nested_cpu_has_virt_x2apic_mode(vmcs12) &&
>> !nested_cpu_has_apic_reg_virt(vmcs12) &&
>> - !nested_cpu_has_vid(vmcs12))
>> + !nested_cpu_has_vid(vmcs12) &&
>> + !nested_cpu_has_posted_intr(vmcs12))
>> return 0;
>>
>> if (nested_cpu_has_virt_x2apic_mode(vmcs12))
>> r = nested_vmx_check_virt_x2apic(vcpu, vmcs12);
>> if (nested_cpu_has_vid(vmcs12))
>> r |= nested_vmx_check_vid(vcpu, vmcs12);
>> + if (nested_cpu_has_posted_intr(vmcs12))
>> + r |= nested_vmx_check_posted_intr(vcpu, vmcs12);
>
> These "if"s are always true.
>
Why? L1 may config these features seperately, we should check them one by one.
e.g. L1 may enable posted interrupt processing and virtual interrupt
delivery, but leaving virtualize x2apic mode disabled, then
nested_cpu_has_virt_x2apic_mode will return false.
> 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