From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Deegan Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/17] vmx: nest: interrupt Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 12:21:58 +0100 Message-ID: <20100520112158.GP4164@whitby.uk.xensource.com> References: <1271929289-18572-1-git-send-email-qing.he@intel.com> <1271929289-18572-10-git-send-email-qing.he@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1271929289-18572-10-git-send-email-qing.he@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Qing He Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org At 10:41 +0100 on 22 Apr (1271932881), Qing He wrote: > +/* > + * Nested virtualization interrupt handling: > + * > + * When vcpu runs in nested context (L2), the event delivery from > + * L0 to L1 may be blocked by several reasons: > + * - virtual VMExit > + * - virtual VMEntry I'm not sure I understand what the plan is here. It looks like you queue up a virtual vmentry or vmexit so that it happens just before the real vmentry and then have to hold off interrupt injection because of it. I'm a little worried that we'll end up taking a virtual vmexit for an interrupt, and then not injecting the interrupt. Maybe you could outline the overall design of how interrupt delivery and virtual vmenter/vmexit should work in nested VMX. I suspect that I've just misunderstood the code. Cheers, Tim. -- Tim Deegan Principal Software Engineer, XenServer Engineering Citrix Systems UK Ltd. (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG)