[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7de4e758-08cc-2c45-b0aa-dfe28dfef398@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 11:29:49 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/kvm/vmx: Don't halt vcpu when L1 is injecting events
to L2
On 08/02/2018 06:13, Chao Gao wrote:
> Although L2 is in halt state, it will be in the active state after
> VM entry if the VM entry is vectoring. Halting the vcpu here means
> the event won't be injected to L2 and this decision isn't reported
> to L1. Thus L0 drops an event that should be injected to L2.
>
> Because virtual interrupt delivery may wake L2 vcpu, if VID is enabled,
> do the same thing -- don't halt L2.
This second part seems wrong to me, or at least overly general. Perhaps
you mean if RVI>0?
Thanks,
Paolo
> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 10 ++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> index bb5b488..e1fe4e4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> @@ -10985,8 +10985,14 @@ static int nested_vmx_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, bool launch)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - if (vmcs12->guest_activity_state == GUEST_ACTIVITY_HLT)
> - return kvm_vcpu_halt(vcpu);
> + if (vmcs12->guest_activity_state == GUEST_ACTIVITY_HLT) {
> + u32 intr_info = vmcs_read32(VM_ENTRY_INTR_INFO_FIELD);
> + u32 exec_control = vmcs_read32(SECONDARY_VM_EXEC_CONTROL);
> +
> + if (!(intr_info & VECTORING_INFO_VALID_MASK) &&
> + !(exec_control & SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUAL_INTR_DELIVERY))
> + return kvm_vcpu_halt(vcpu);
> + }
> vmx->nested.nested_run_pending = 1;
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists