[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7060AA92-0ACD-40F6-868A-5A7234F46C55@amazon.de>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 07:05:57 +0000
From: "Graf (AWS), Alexander" <graf@...zon.de>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
CC: "Suthikulpanit, Suravee" <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"rkrcmar@...hat.com" <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
"joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>,
"vkuznets@...hat.com" <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
"rkagan@...tuozzo.com" <rkagan@...tuozzo.com>,
"Schoenherr, Jan H." <jschoenh@...zon.de>,
"Raslan, KarimAllah" <karahmed@...zon.de>,
"Lukaszewicz, Rimas" <rimasluk@...zon.com>,
"Grimm, Jon" <Jon.Grimm@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 13/17] kvm: i8254: Deactivate APICv when using
in-kernel PIT re-injection mode.
> Am 04.11.2019 um 22:50 schrieb Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>:
>
> On 04/11/19 19:54, Suthikulpanit, Suravee wrote:
>> I see you point.
>>
>>> We can work around it by adding a global mask of inhibit reasons that
>>> apply to the vendor, and initializing it as soon as possible in vmx.c/svm.c.
>>>
>>> Then kvm_request_apicv_update can ignore reasons that the vendor doesn't
>>> care about.
>>
>> What about we enhance the pre_update_apivc_exec_ctrl() to also return
>> success/fail. In here, the vendor specific code can decide to update
>> APICv state or not.
>
> That works for me, too. Something like return false for deactivate and
> true for activate.
I'm trying to wrap my head around how that will work with live migration. Do we also need to save/restore the deactivate reasons?
Alex
>
> Paolo
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Krausenstr. 38
10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Christian Schlaeger, Ralf Herbrich
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg unter HRB 149173 B
Sitz: Berlin
Ust-ID: DE 289 237 879
Powered by blists - more mailing lists