On 12/9/20 3:41 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > On 9 December 2020 13:26:55 GMT, Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 12/9/20 11:39 AM, David Woodhouse wrote: >>> As far as I can tell, Xen's hvm_vcpu_has_pending_irq() will still >>> return the domain-wide vector in preference to the one in the LAPIC, >> if >>> it actually gets invoked. >> >> Only if the callback installed is HVMIRQ_callback_vector IIUC. >> >> Otherwise the vector would be pending like any other LAPIC vector. > > Ah, right. > > For some reason I had it in my head that you could only set the per-vCPU lapic vector if the domain was set to HVMIRQ_callback_vector. If the domain is set to HVMIRQ_callback_none, that clearly makes more sense. > > Still, my patch should do the same as Xen does in the case where a guest does set both, I think. > > Faithful compatibility with odd Xen behaviour FTW :) > Ah, yes. In that case, HVMIRQ_callback_vector does take precedence. But it would be very weird for a guest to setup two callback vectors :)
