On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 08:04, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > From: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Let's get the information whether or not guests disable interruptions.
>
> This is missing critical information for _why_. It took me some staring to
> understand that this allows querying IRQs from a _different_ vCPU, which needs
> caching on VMX due to the need to do a VMREAD.
Yes.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 +++
> > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > index 50f011a7445a..8e05cbfa9827 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > @@ -861,6 +861,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_arch {
> > bool preempt_count_enabled;
> > struct gfn_to_hva_cache preempt_count_cache;
> > } pv_pc;
> > + bool irq_disabled;
>
> This is going to at best be confusing, and at worst lead to bugs The flag is
> valid if and only if the vCPU is not loaded. I don't have a clever answer, but
> this needs to have some form of guard to (a) clarify when it's valid and (b) actively
> prevent misuse.
How about renaming it to last_guest_irq_disabled and comments as /*
Guest irq disabled state, valid iff the vCPU is not loaded */
Wanpeng
