On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 06:20:01PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 12/03/2014 11:40, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
> >2014-03-11 22:05-0300, Marcelo Tosatti:
> >>On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 07:11:18PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> >>>We always disable cr8 intercept in its handler, but only re-enable it
> >>>if handling KVM_REQ_EVENT, so there can be a window where we do not
> >>>intercept cr8 writes, which allows an interrupt to disrupt a higher
> >>>priority task.
> >>>
> >>>Fix this by disabling intercepts in the same function that re-enables
> >>>them when needed. This fixes BSOD in Windows 2008.
> >>>
> >>>Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>---
> >>> arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 6 +++---
> >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>>diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> >>>index 64d9bb9..f676c18 100644
> >>>--- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> >>>+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> >>>@@ -3003,10 +3003,8 @@ static int cr8_write_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
> >>> u8 cr8_prev = kvm_get_cr8(&svm->vcpu);
> >>> /* instruction emulation calls kvm_set_cr8() */
> >>> r = cr_interception(svm);
> >>>- if (irqchip_in_kernel(svm->vcpu.kvm)) {
> >>>- clr_cr_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_CR8_WRITE);
> >>>+ if (irqchip_in_kernel(svm->vcpu.kvm))
> >>> return r;
> >>>- }
>
> I think that the old code here makes little sense, and for two reasons:
>
I agree that old code is wrong and the patch looks correct, but I only
see how the bug may cause pending IRR to not be delivered in time,
not how interrupt can disrupt a higher priority task.
--
Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html