Re: [PATCH v19 108/130] KVM: TDX: Handle TDX PV HLT hypercall

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


>> > >+	union tdx_vcpu_state_details details;
>> > >+	struct vcpu_tdx *tdx = to_tdx(vcpu);
>> > >+
>> > >+	if (ret || vcpu->arch.mp_state != KVM_MP_STATE_HALTED)
>> > >+		return true;
>> > 
>> > Question: why mp_state matters here?
>> > >+
>> > >+	if (tdx->interrupt_disabled_hlt)
>> > >+		return false;
>> > 
>> > Shouldn't we move this into vt_interrupt_allowed()? VMX calls the function to
>> > check if interrupt is disabled.
>Chao, are you suggesting to implement tdx_interrupt_allowed() as
>"EXIT_REASON_HLT && a0" instead of "return true"?
>I don't think it makes sense because it's rare case and we can't avoid spurious
>wakeup for TDX case.

Yes. KVM differeniates "interrupt allowed" from "has interrupt", e.g.,

static inline bool kvm_vcpu_has_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)

	if (kvm_arch_interrupt_allowed(vcpu) &&
	    (kvm_cpu_has_interrupt(vcpu) ||
		return true;

I think tdx_protected_apic_has_interrupt() mixes them together, which isn't

Probably it is a minor thing; if no one else thinks it is better to move the
"interrupt allowed" check to tdx_interrupt_allowed(), I am also fine with not
doing that.

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux