On 06/22/2010 11:10 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 11:29:40AM -0400, Chris Lalancette wrote:
Older versions of 32-bit linux have a "Checking 'hlt' instruction"
test where they repeatedly call the 'hlt' instruction, and then
expect a timer interrupt to kick the CPU out of halt. This happens
before any LAPIC or IOAPIC setup happens, which means that all of
the APIC's are in virtual wire mode at this point. Unfortunately,
the current implementation of virtual wire mode is hardcoded to
only kick the BSP, so if a crash+kexec occurs on a different
vcpu, it will never get kicked.
This patch makes pic_unlock() do the equivalent of
kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic() for the IOAPIC code. That is, it runs
through all of the vcpus looking for one that is in virtual wire
mode. In the normal case where LAPICs and IOAPICs are configured,
this won't be used at all. In the bootstrap phase of a modern
OS, before the LAPICs and IOAPICs are configured, this will have
exactly the same behavior as today; VCPU0 is always looked at
first, so it will always get out of the loop after the first
iteration. This will only go through the loop more than once
during a kexec/kdump, in which case it will only do it a few times
until the kexec'ed kernel programs the LAPIC and IOAPIC.
Signed-off-by: Chris Lalancette<clalance@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c b/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
index 2c73f44..85ecabc 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
@@ -44,16 +44,25 @@ static void pic_unlock(struct kvm_pic *s)
__releases(&s->lock)
{
bool wakeup = s->wakeup_needed;
- struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
+ struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, *found = NULL;
+ int i;
s->wakeup_needed = false;
raw_spin_unlock(&s->lock);
if (wakeup) {
- vcpu = s->kvm->bsp_vcpu;
- if (vcpu)
- kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu);
+ kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, s->kvm) {
+ if (kvm_apic_accept_pic_intr(vcpu)) {
+ found = vcpu;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
Shouldn't we kick all vcpus that are in virtual write mode, not just
first one found?
If two lapics are in ExtInt mode, both will perform the IntAck cycle and
the PIC might get confused. I don't think it's a valid configuration.
So I think the patch is fine.
There's a slight issue in that if an interrupt happens while a vcpu is
turning off LVT0.ExtInt, the interrupt gets lost. But this is better
than what we have now.
btw, I think virtual wire refers to:
pic -> ioapic(ExtInt) -> (apic bus) -> lapic
(virtual wire since the interrupt is passed over the apic bus, not a
real wire)
while our configuration is
pic -> lint0 -> lapic lvt0 (ExtInt)
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
