On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:54:39AM +0800, Binbin Wu wrote:
> +static int tdx_complete_vmcall_map_gpa(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + struct vcpu_tdx *tdx = to_tdx(vcpu);
> +
> + if (vcpu->run->hypercall.ret) {
> + tdvmcall_set_return_code(vcpu, TDVMCALL_STATUS_INVALID_OPERAND);
> + tdx->vp_enter_args.r11 = tdx->map_gpa_next;
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + tdx->map_gpa_next += TDX_MAP_GPA_MAX_LEN;
> + if (tdx->map_gpa_next >= tdx->map_gpa_end)
> + return 1;
> +
> + /*
> + * Stop processing the remaining part if there is pending interrupt.
> + * Skip checking pending virtual interrupt (reflected by
> + * TDX_VCPU_STATE_DETAILS_INTR_PENDING bit) to save a seamcall because
> + * if guest disabled interrupt, it's OK not returning back to guest
> + * due to non-NMI interrupt. Also it's rare to TDVMCALL_MAP_GPA
> + * immediately after STI or MOV/POP SS.
> + */
> + if (pi_has_pending_interrupt(vcpu) ||
> + kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu) || vcpu->arch.nmi_pending) {
Should here also use "kvm_vcpu_has_events()" to replace
"pi_has_pending_interrupt(vcpu) ||
kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu) || vcpu->arch.nmi_pending" as Sean
suggested at [1]?
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Z4rIGv4E7Jdmhl8P@xxxxxxxxxx
> + tdvmcall_set_return_code(vcpu, TDVMCALL_STATUS_RETRY);
> + tdx->vp_enter_args.r11 = tdx->map_gpa_next;
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + __tdx_map_gpa(tdx);
> + return 0;
> +}
