Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 06/08/21 12:07, Hikaru Nishida wrote: >> +#if defined(CONFIG_KVM_VIRT_SUSPEND_TIMING) || \ >> + defined(CONFIG_KVM_VIRT_SUSPEND_TIMING_GUEST) >> +#define VIRT_SUSPEND_TIMING_VECTOR 0xec >> +#endif > > No need to use a new vector. You can rename the existing > MSR_KVM_ASYNC_PF_INT to MSR_KVM_HYPERVISOR_CALLBACK_INT or something > like that, and add the code to sysvec_kvm_asyncpf_interrupt. On the host side, I'd vote for keeping MSR_KVM_ASYNC_PF_INT for async PF mechanism only for two reasons: - We may want to use (currently reserved) upper 56 bits of it for new asyncPF related features (e.g. flags) and it would be unnatural to add them to 'MSR_KVM_HYPERVISOR_CALLBACK_INT' - We should probably leave it to the guest if it wants to share 'suspend time' notification interrupt with async PF (and if it actually wants to get one/another). On the guest side, it is perfectly fine to reuse HYPERVISOR_CALLBACK_VECTOR for everything. -- Vitaly
