From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yang Zhang Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] KVM: x86: Use vector-hashing to deliver lowest-priority interrupts Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:07:00 +0800 Message-ID: <56A07584.1000301@gmail.com> References: <1453254177-103002-1-git-send-email-feng.wu@intel.com> <1453254177-103002-3-git-send-email-feng.wu@intel.com> <56A06B60.5030501@gmail.com> <56A06FD7.4050803@gmail.com> <56A0734E.8050508@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" To: "Wu, Feng" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "rkrcmar@redhat.com" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 2016/1/21 14:02, Wu, Feng wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Yang Zhang [mailto:yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 1:58 PM >> To: Wu, Feng ; pbonzini@redhat.com; >> rkrcmar@redhat.com >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; kvm@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] KVM: x86: Use vector-hashing to deliver lowest- >> priority interrupts >> >>>> >>>> I remember we have discussed that even the LAPIC is software disabled, >>>> it still can respond to some interrupts like INIT, NMI, SMI, and SIPI >>>> messages. Isn't current logic still problematically? >>> >>> I don't think there are problems, here we only cover lowest-priority mode. >> >> Does Intel SDM said those interrupts cannot be delivered on >> lowest-priority mode? > > Fixed, Lowest-priority, SMI, NMI, INIT are all "Delivery Mode", once it is > Lowest-priority, it cannot be other type, afaik. You are correct, I missed it with physical and logical mode. Also, i noticed you have the check at the beginning: + if (!kvm_lowest_prio_delivery(irq)) + goto set_irq; -- best regards yang