Il 04/09/2014 09:02, Gleb Natapov ha scritto: > On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 05:13:49PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> > This is required for the following patch to work correctly. If a nested page >> > fault happens during emulation, we must inject a vmexit, not a page fault. >> > Luckily we already have the required machinery: it is enough to return >> > X86EMUL_INTERCEPTED instead of X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT. >> > > I wonder why this patch is needed. X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT causes > ctxt->have_exception to be set to true in x86_emulate_insn(). > x86_emulate_instruction() checks ctxt->have_exception and calls > inject_emulated_exception() if it is true. inject_emulated_exception() > calls kvm_propagate_fault() where we check if the fault was nested and > generate vmexit or a page fault accordingly. Good question. :) If you do that, KVM gets down to the "if (writeback)" and writes the ctxt->eip from L2 into the L1 EIP. Possibly this patch can be replaced by just this? diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c index 022513b..475e979 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c @@ -5312,7 +5312,7 @@ restart: if (ctxt->have_exception) { inject_emulated_exception(vcpu); - r = EMULATE_DONE; + return EMULATE_DONE; } else if (vcpu->arch.pio.count) { if (!vcpu->arch.pio.in) { /* FIXME: return into emulator if single-stepping. */ But I'm not sure how to test it, and I like the idea of treating nested page faults like other nested vmexits during emulation (which is what this patch does). If I included this patch, I could then remove kvm_propagate_fault like (I think) this: diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c index 92493e10937c..e096db566ac2 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c @@ -4910,9 +4902,10 @@ static void toggle_interruptibility(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 mask) static void inject_emulated_exception(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt = &vcpu->arch.emulate_ctxt; - if (ctxt->exception.vector == PF_VECTOR) - kvm_propagate_fault(vcpu, &ctxt->exception); - else if (ctxt->exception.error_code_valid) + if (ctxt->exception.vector == PF_VECTOR) { + WARN_ON(fault->nested_page_fault); + vcpu->arch.walk_mmu->inject_page_fault(vcpu, fault); + } else if (ctxt->exception.error_code_valid) kvm_queue_exception_e(vcpu, ctxt->exception.vector, ctxt->exception.error_code); else What do you think? Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html