2016-06-06 16:10 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > On 05/06/2016 05:28, Wanpeng Li wrote: >>> > No, I don't think so, the existing req_immediate_exit case is only after >>> > a VMLAUNCH/VMRESUME vmexit, in which case we already have a >>> > >>> > if (vmx->nested.nested_run_pending) >>> > kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu); >>> > >>> > in vmx_vcpu_run. >> Do you think this can be removed since it blindly request a >> KVM_REQ_EVENT even if there is no still-pending event to L1 which >> blocked by nested_run_pending, however, req_immediate_exit can >> indicate there is a pending event blocked by nested_run_pending and >> the request KVM_REQUEST_EVENT added in your patch can guarantee inject >> this pending event in the next nested vmexit. > > Yes, I think so. Yeah, maybe somebody who is interested in can clean it up and confirm there is no regression. :) Regards, Wanpeng Li -- 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
