> On May 8, 2019, at 4:11 PM, Jim Mattson <jmattson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, May 8, 2019 at 10:47 AM > To: Paolo Bonzini > Cc: <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Nadav Amit, Jim Mattson, Sean Christopherson > >> From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> According to Intel SDM 26.3.1.5 "Checks on Guest Non-Register State", if >> the activity state is HLT, the only events that can be injected are NMI, >> MTF and "Those with interruption type hardware exception and vector 1 >> (debug exception) or vector 18 (machine-check exception)." >> >> Two tests, verify_nmi_window_exit() and verify_intr_window_exit(), try >> to do something that real hardware disallows (i.e., fail the VM-entry) >> by injecting #UD in HLT-state. Inject #DB instead as the injection >> should succeed in these tests. >> >> Cc: Jim Mattson <jmattson@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@xxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks for the fix! > > It has always bothered me that there is no easy way to validate a > kvm-unit-test on physical hardware. Do you have a mechanism for doing > so? If so, would you be willing to share? I call this mechanism “grub”. ;-) If you saw my recent kvm-unit-tests patches - they are needed to run kvm-unit-tests on physical hardware. Once I am done sending the remaining fixes, I’ll send an RFC that enable test execution on physical hardware (e.g., by skipping tests that require test devices). I just hope that this support would convince you, and others, to prefer (when possible) kvm-unit-tests over the selftest environment. > I don't suppose you have a patch for kvm to fail the VM-entry in this case? I am trying to keep my day job.
