On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 01:17:50PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>> - svm->vmcb->save.cs.base = svm->vcpu.arch.sipi_vector << 12;
> >>>> - svm->vmcb->save.cs.selector = svm->vcpu.arch.sipi_vector << 8;
> >>>> - }
> >>>>
> >>>> kvm_cpuid(vcpu, &eax, &dummy, &dummy, &dummy);
> >>>> kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RDX, eax);
> >>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> >>>> index f17cd2a..5b862ed 100644
> >>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> >>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> >>>> @@ -4121,10 +4121,6 @@ static void vmx_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >>>> seg_setup(VCPU_SREG_CS);
> >>>> if (kvm_vcpu_is_bsp(&vmx->vcpu))
> >>>> vmcs_write16(GUEST_CS_SELECTOR, 0xf000);
> >>>> - else {
> >>>> - vmcs_write16(GUEST_CS_SELECTOR, vmx->vcpu.arch.sipi_vector << 8);
> >>>> - vmcs_writel(GUEST_CS_BASE, vmx->vcpu.arch.sipi_vector << 12);
> >>>> - }
> >>>>
> >>>> seg_setup(VCPU_SREG_DS);
> >>>> seg_setup(VCPU_SREG_ES);
> >>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> >>>> index b891ac3..37c0807 100644
> >>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> >>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> >>>> @@ -162,8 +162,6 @@ u64 __read_mostly host_xcr0;
> >>>>
> >>>> static int emulator_fix_hypercall(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt);
> >>>>
> >>>> -static void kvm_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> >>>> -
> >>>> static inline void kvm_async_pf_hash_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >>>> {
> >>>> int i;
> >>>> @@ -2823,10 +2821,9 @@ static void kvm_vcpu_ioctl_x86_get_vcpu_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> >>>> events->nmi.masked = kvm_x86_ops->get_nmi_mask(vcpu);
> >>>> events->nmi.pad = 0;
> >>>>
> >>>> - events->sipi_vector = vcpu->arch.sipi_vector;
> >>>> + events->sipi_vector = 0; /* never valid when reporting to user space */
> >>>>
> >>>> events->flags = (KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_NMI_PENDING
> >>>> - | KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_SIPI_VECTOR
> >>>> | KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_SHADOW);
> >>>> memset(&events->reserved, 0, sizeof(events->reserved));
> >>>> }
> >>>> @@ -2857,8 +2854,9 @@ static int kvm_vcpu_ioctl_x86_set_vcpu_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> >>>> vcpu->arch.nmi_pending = events->nmi.pending;
> >>>> kvm_x86_ops->set_nmi_mask(vcpu, events->nmi.masked);
> >>>>
> >>>> - if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_SIPI_VECTOR)
> >>>> - vcpu->arch.sipi_vector = events->sipi_vector;
> >>>> + if (events->flags & KVM_VCPUEVENT_VALID_SIPI_VECTOR &&
> >>>> + kvm_vcpu_has_lapic(vcpu))
> >>>> + vcpu->arch.apic->sipi_vector = events->sipi_vector;
> >>> This looks out of place in this patch. Why is it needed?
> >>
> >> It is required as long as we support MP_STATE_SIPI_RECEIVED as input
> >> from user space.
> > What problem are fixing with adding kvm_vcpu_has_lapic() here?
>
> A NULL pointer access when setting the mp_state of a VCPU without an APIC.
>
Only now I noticed that you changed vcpu->arch.sipi_vector to
vcpu->arch.apic->sipi_vector :)
--
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
