On 2014/11/5 16:50, Wang, Wei W wrote:
On 05/11/2014 4:07, Tiejun Chen wrote:
A bug was reported as follows: when running Windows 7 32-bit guests
on qemu-kvm, sometimes the guests run into blue screen during
reboot. The problem was that a guest's RVI was not cleared when it
rebooted. This
patch has fixed the problem.
Signed-off-by: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Yang Zhang <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Rongrong Liu <rongrongx.liu@xxxxxxxxx>, Da Chun
<ngugc@xxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 3 +++
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 12 ++++++------
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c index
66dd173..6942742 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
@@ -1712,6 +1712,9 @@ void kvm_apic_post_state_restore(struct
kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
apic->isr_count = kvm_apic_vid_enabled(vcpu->kvm) ?
1 : count_vectors(apic->regs + APIC_ISR);
apic->highest_isr_cache = -1;
+ if (kvm_x86_ops->hwapic_irr_update)
+ kvm_x86_ops->hwapic_irr_update(vcpu,
+ apic_find_highest_irr(apic));
Could we pass 0 directly? Because looks we just need to clear RVI.
kvm_x86_ops->hwapic_irr_update(vcpu, 0);
I think this already makes sense based on your description.
Thanks
Tiejun
No. This is a restore function, and we cannot assume that the callers
always need to reset to the initial state.
Okay. Maybe I'm confused by the following change.
Wei
kvm_x86_ops->hwapic_isr_update(vcpu->kvm,
apic_find_highest_isr(apic));
kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu);
kvm_rtc_eoi_tracking_restore_one(vcpu);
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c index
fe4d2f4..d632548 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
@@ -7292,19 +7292,19 @@ static void vmx_set_rvi(int vector)
static void vmx_hwapic_irr_update(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int max_irr)
{
if (max_irr == -1)
+ max_irr = 0;
+
+ if (!is_guest_mode(vcpu)) {
+ vmx_set_rvi(max_irr);
return;
+ }
/*
* If a vmexit is needed, vmx_check_nested_events handles it.
*/
- if (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && nested_exit_on_intr(vcpu))
+ if ((is_guest_mode(vcpu) && nested_exit_on_intr(vcpu)) || max_irr
==
+0)
Its really not readable to modify max_irr as 0 and check that here, and
especially when you read the original comment.
So what about this?
I think both are ok.
If we zero max_irr in vmx_set_rvi(), we still need this check:
if ((is_guest_mode(vcpu) && nested_exit_on_intr(vcpu)) || max_irr == -1)
No, I don't think we need to add this.
Let's see if Paolo has any comments, then send out a second version.
Wei
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c index
0cd99d8..bc4558b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
@@ -7280,6 +7280,9 @@ static void vmx_set_rvi(int vector)
u16 status;
u8 old;
+ if (vector == -1)
+ vector = 0;
+
status = vmcs_read16(GUEST_INTR_STATUS);
old = (u8)status & 0xff;
if ((u8)vector != old) {
@@ -7291,9 +7294,6 @@ static void vmx_set_rvi(int vector)
static void vmx_hwapic_irr_update(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int max_irr)
{
- if (max_irr == -1)
- return;
-
/*
* If a vmexit is needed, vmx_check_nested_events handles it.
*/
@@ -7305,6 +7305,9 @@ static void vmx_hwapic_irr_update(struct
kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int max_irr)
return;
}
+ if (max_irr == -1)
+ return;
+
Did you see this?
Tiejun
/*
* Fall back to pre-APICv interrupt injection since L2
* is run without virtual interrupt delivery.
Thanks
Tiejun
return;
- if (!is_guest_mode(vcpu)) {
- vmx_set_rvi(max_irr);
- return;
- }
-
/*
* Fall back to pre-APICv interrupt injection since L2
* is run without virtual interrupt delivery.
--
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
