On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:07 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 15/04/21 02:59, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > The next call to inject_pending_event() will reach here AT FIRST with
> > vcpu->arch.exception.injected==false and vcpu->arch.exception.pending==false
> >
> >> ... if (!vcpu->arch.excepti
On 15/04/21 02:59, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
The next call to inject_pending_event() will reach here AT FIRST with
vcpu->arch.exception.injected==false and vcpu->arch.exception.pending==false
... if (!vcpu->arch.exception.pending) {
if (vcpu->arch.nmi_injected) {
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 12:58 AM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 14/04/21 04:28, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 8:15 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>
> >> On 13/04/21 13:03, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >>> This patch claims that it has a place to
> >>> stash the IRQ when EFLAGS.IF=0, but inj
On 14/04/21 04:28, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 8:15 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 13/04/21 13:03, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
This patch claims that it has a place to
stash the IRQ when EFLAGS.IF=0, but inject_pending_event() seams to ignore
EFLAGS.IF and queues the IRQ to the guest di
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 8:15 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 13/04/21 13:03, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > This patch claims that it has a place to
> > stash the IRQ when EFLAGS.IF=0, but inject_pending_event() seams to ignore
> > EFLAGS.IF and queues the IRQ to the guest directly in the first branch
>
On 13/04/21 13:03, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
This patch claims that it has a place to
stash the IRQ when EFLAGS.IF=0, but inject_pending_event() seams to ignore
EFLAGS.IF and queues the IRQ to the guest directly in the first branch
of using "kvm_x86_ops.set_irq(vcpu)".
This is only true for pure-use
On 12/04/21 23:43, Sean Christopherson wrote:
where kvm_arch_interrupt_allowed() checks EFLAGS.IF (and an edge case related to
nested virtualization). KVM also captures EFLAGS.IF in vcpu->run->if_flag.
For whatever reason, QEMU checks both vcpu->run flags before injecting an IRQ,
maybe to handle
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 5:43 AM Sean Christopherson wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2021, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:26 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > >
> > > kvm_cpu_accept_dm_intr and kvm_vcpu_ready_for_interrupt_injection are
> > > a hodge-podge of conditions, hacked together t
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:26 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> > kvm_cpu_accept_dm_intr and kvm_vcpu_ready_for_interrupt_injection are
> > a hodge-podge of conditions, hacked together to get something that
> > more or less works. But what is actually neede
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 7:26 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> kvm_cpu_accept_dm_intr and kvm_vcpu_ready_for_interrupt_injection are
> a hodge-podge of conditions, hacked together to get something that
> more or less works. But what is actually needed is much simpler;
> in both cases the fundamental qu
On 11/27/20 12:21 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
kvm_cpu_accept_dm_intr and kvm_vcpu_ready_for_interrupt_injection are
a hodge-podge of conditions, hacked together to get something that
more or less works. But what is actually needed is much simpler;
in both cases the fundamental question is, do we
kvm_cpu_accept_dm_intr and kvm_vcpu_ready_for_interrupt_injection are
a hodge-podge of conditions, hacked together to get something that
more or less works. But what is actually needed is much simpler;
in both cases the fundamental question is, do we have a place to stash
an interrupt if userspace
12 matches
Mail list logo
