On 6/7/2022 6:44 PM, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-06-02 at 19:56 +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote:
>> Inject the NMI by setting V_NMI in the VMCB interrupt control. processor
>> will clear V_NMI to acknowledge processing has started and will keep the
>> V_NMI_MASK set until the processor is done with processing the NMI event.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <santosh.shukla@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c | 7 ++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
>> index a405e414cae4..200f979169e0 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
>> @@ -3385,11 +3385,16 @@ static void svm_inject_nmi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>> struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
>>
>> + ++vcpu->stat.nmi_injections;
>> + if (is_vnmi_enabled(svm->vmcb)) {
>> + svm->vmcb->control.int_ctl |= V_NMI_PENDING;
>> + return;
>> + }
> Here I would advice to have a warning to check if vNMI is already pending.
>
Yes, in v2.
> Also we need to check what happens if we make vNMI pending and get #SMI,
> while in #NMI handler, or if #NMI is blocked due to interrupt window.
>
V_NMI_MASK should be saved as 1 in the save area and
hypervisor will resume the NMI handler after handling the SMI.
Thanks,
Santosh
> Best regards,
> Maxim Levitsky
>
>
>> +
>> svm->vmcb->control.event_inj = SVM_EVTINJ_VALID | SVM_EVTINJ_TYPE_NMI;
>> vcpu->arch.hflags |= HF_NMI_MASK;
>> if (!sev_es_guest(vcpu->kvm))
>> svm_set_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_IRET);
>> - ++vcpu->stat.nmi_injections;
>> }
>>
>> static void svm_inject_irq(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>
>
