[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f9d32c25-9167-f1a7-cda7-182a785b92aa@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 13:29:00 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] KVM: x86: acknowledgment mechanism for async pf
page ready notifications
On 25/05/20 16:41, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> + case MSR_KVM_ASYNC_PF_ACK:
> + if (data & 0x1) {
> + vcpu->arch.apf.pageready_pending = false;
> + kvm_check_async_pf_completion(vcpu);
> + }
> + break;
> case MSR_KVM_STEAL_TIME:
>
> if (unlikely(!sched_info_on()))
> @@ -3183,6 +3189,9 @@ int kvm_get_msr_common(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> case MSR_KVM_ASYNC_PF_INT:
> msr_info->data = vcpu->arch.apf.msr_int_val;
> break;
> + case MSR_KVM_ASYNC_PF_ACK:
> + msr_info->data = 0;
> + break;
How is the pageready_pending flag migrated? Should we revert the
direction of the MSR (i.e. read the flag, and write 0 to clear it)?
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists