Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:44:41PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: >>> Thinking about the implications: Independent of virtualization, this >>> means that no code code can in any way rely on the STI shadow if there >>> are NMIs present that could "consume" it. Because after return from >>> those NMIs, interrupts could then be injected on the instruction that >>> was originally under the shadow. >>> >> Wow. Maybe we should request an interrupt window instead when >> blocked-by-STI is active instead of clearing it. >> > Wow indeed. We can remember blocked by sti state before injecting NMI > and request nmi window open exit. When we get nmi window open exit we > can restore blocked by sti flag. For sure we could. But I still wonder what happens to the shadow in such a scenario on real HW. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux -- 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
