On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 10:30:10AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 11/01/2010 08:55 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > index 2cfdf2d..f7aed95 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > @@ -5295,8 +5295,9 @@ static int __vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > {
> > switch(vcpu->arch.mp_state) {
> > case KVM_MP_STATE_HALTED:
> > - vcpu->arch.mp_state =
> > - KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE;
> > + if (list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done))
> > + vcpu->arch.mp_state =
> > + KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE;
>
> if nmi/interrupt and apfs completed event occur at the same time, we will miss to
> exit halt sate. Maybe we can check the pending event here, see below patch please.
>
No, we will not. If nmi/interrupt and apfs completed event occur at the same
time kvm_vcpu_block() will exit with KVM_REQ_UNHALT set, but cpu will
not be unhalted because of list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done)
check. Vcpu then will process pending apf completion and enter
kvm_vcpu_block() again which will immediately exit because
kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() will return true since there is pending
nmi/interrupt. This time vcpu will be unhalted.
> > case KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE:
> > vcpu->arch.apf.halted = false;
> > break;
> > @@ -6279,6 +6280,7 @@ void kvm_arch_async_page_present(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > vcpu->arch.fault.error_code = 0;
> > vcpu->arch.fault.address = work->arch.token;
> > kvm_inject_page_fault(vcpu);
> > + vcpu->arch.mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE;
> > }
> > }
>
> Have a stupid question, why we make the vcpu runnable here? Sorry i don't know
> kvm pv guest to much. :-(
Because kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() does not check for pending exceptions.
Since now we do not unhalt vcpu when apf completion happens we need to
unhalt it here. But, as I said, the patch is untested.
--
Gleb.
--
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
