[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fce53908-4b7b-5ef1-eb60-360a505b21d3@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 21:24:33 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>,
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/35] SEV-ES hypervisor support
On 30/11/20 20:35, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> Delayed interrupts are fine, since they are injected according to RVI and
>> the posted interrupt descriptor. I'm thinking more of events (exceptions
>> and interrupts) that caused an EPT violation exit and were recorded in the
>> IDT-vectored info field.
> Ah. As is, I don't believe KVM has access to this information. TDX-Module
> handles the actual EPT violation, as well as event reinjection. The EPT
> violation reported by SEAMRET is synthesized, and IIRC the IDT-vectoring field
> is not readable.
>
> Regardless, is there an actual a problem with having a "pending" exception that
> isn't reported to userspace? Obviously the info needs to be migrated, but that
> will be taken care of by virtue of migrating the VMCS.
No problem, I suppose we would just have to get used to not being able
to look into the state of migrated VMs.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists