On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 01:05:57AM -0700, Alexander Graf wrote: > > Am 22.09.2009 um 18:26 schrieb Joerg Roedel <joro@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > >On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 03:00:29PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > >>SVM has some cleanup code, that tries to reinject interrupts and > >>exceptions > >>when the guest didn't manage to deal with them yet. It basically > >>transfers > >>them to KVM internal state. > >> > >>Unfortunately, the internal state is reserved for the L1 guest > >>state, so we > >>shouldn't try to go through that logic when running a nested guest. > >> > >>When doing something the host KVM can handle, let's just > >>reinject the event > >>into the L2 guest, because we didn't touch its state anyways. > > > >I don't really understandt what problem this patch addresses. > >There are > >situations where we have events to reinject into the l2 guest > >directly. > >But the generic reinjection code works fine for it. > >The only problematic thing with it is that it implicitly relies on > >exit_int_info not to be changed in the exit cycle (which would be > >worth > >a comment). > > It simply tries to be too clever. Reevaluating exceptions won't work > for example. > Can you elaborate? What do you mean by "too clever" and why reevaluating exceptions won't work? -- Gleb. -- 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
