[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fba03de3-f44b-4a2d-a15a-4071c5b09427@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 21:45:44 +0000
From: Ivan Orlov <ivan.orlov0322@...il.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, Ivan Orlov <iorlov@...zon.com>
Cc: bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, mingo@...hat.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, shuah@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, pdurrant@...zon.co.uk,
dwmw@...zon.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Enhance event delivery error handling
On 12/11/24 18:20, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024, Ivan Orlov wrote:
>> Currently, the situation when guest accesses MMIO during vectoring is
>> handled differently on VMX and SVM: on VMX KVM returns internal error,
>> when SVM goes into infinite loop trying to deliver an event again and
>> again.
>>
>> This patch series eliminates this difference by returning a KVM internal
>> error when guest performs MMIO during vectoring for both VMX and SVM.
>>
>> Also, introduce a selftest test case which covers the error handling
>> mentioned above.
>>
>> V1 -> V2:
>> - Make commit messages more brief, avoid using pronouns
>> - Extract SVM error handling into a separate commit
>> - Introduce a new X86EMUL_ return type and detect the unhandleable
>> vectoring error in vendor-specific check_emulate_instruction instead of
>> handling it in the common MMU code (which is specific for cached MMIO)
>>
>> Ivan Orlov (6):
>> KVM: x86: Add function for vectoring error generation
>> KVM: x86: Add emulation status for vectoring during MMIO
>> KVM: VMX: Handle vectoring error in check_emulate_instruction
>> KVM: SVM: Handle MMIO during vectroing error
>> selftests: KVM: extract lidt into helper function
>> selftests: KVM: Add test case for MMIO during vectoring
>
> Minor nits throughout, but unless you disagree with my suggestions, I'll fix them
> up when applying, i.e. no need to post a v3.
>
Hi Sean,
Thanks a lot for the review :)
I don't have any conceptual disagreement with your suggestions, so
please feel free to fix them when applying the patches. Thanks!
--
Kind regards,
Ivan Orlov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists