Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] KVM: Use eoi to track RTC interrupt delivery status

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

Il 29/03/2013 04:25, Zhang, Yang Z ha scritto:
> Paolo Bonzini wrote on 2013-03-26:
>> Il 22/03/2013 06:24, Yang Zhang ha scritto:
>>> +static void rtc_irq_ack_eoi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>>> +			struct rtc_status *rtc_status, int irq)
>>> +{
>>> +	if (irq != RTC_GSI)
>>> +		return;
>>> +
>>> +	if (test_and_clear_bit(vcpu->vcpu_id, rtc_status->dest_map))
>>> +		--rtc_status->pending_eoi;
>>> +
>>> +	WARN_ON(rtc_status->pending_eoi < 0);
>>> +}
>>
>> This is the only case where you're passing the struct rtc_status instead
>> of the struct kvm_ioapic.  Please use the latter, and make it the first
>> argument.
>>
>>> @@ -244,7 +268,14 @@ static int ioapic_deliver(struct kvm_ioapic *ioapic, int
>> irq)
>>>  	irqe.level = 1;
>>>  	irqe.shorthand = 0;
>>> -	return kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic(ioapic->kvm, NULL, &irqe, NULL);
>>> +	if (irq == RTC_GSI) {
>>> +		ret = kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic(ioapic->kvm, NULL, &irqe,
>>> +				ioapic->rtc_status.dest_map);
>>> +		ioapic->rtc_status.pending_eoi = ret;
>>
>> I think you should either add a
>>
>>     BUG_ON(ioapic->rtc_status.pending_eoi != 0);
>> or use "ioapic->rtc_status.pending_eoi += ret" (or both).
>>
> There may malicious guest to write EOI more than once. And the
> pending_eoi will be negative. But it should not be a bug. Just WARN_ON
> is enough. And we already do it in ack_eoi. So don't need to do
> duplicated thing here.

Even WARN_ON is too much if it is guest-triggerable.  But then it is
better to make it "+=", I think.

Paolo