From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Don't call svm_complete_interrupts for nested guests
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:28:20 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090923082819.GV23157@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D305191D-FE31-4CD6-85F5-0CB13D856DA8@suse.de>
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 01:05:57AM -0700, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> Am 22.09.2009 um 18:26 schrieb Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>:
>
> >On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 03:00:29PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>SVM has some cleanup code, that tries to reinject interrupts and
> >>exceptions
> >>when the guest didn't manage to deal with them yet. It basically
> >>transfers
> >>them to KVM internal state.
> >>
> >>Unfortunately, the internal state is reserved for the L1 guest
> >>state, so we
> >>shouldn't try to go through that logic when running a nested guest.
> >>
> >>When doing something the host KVM can handle, let's just
> >>reinject the event
> >>into the L2 guest, because we didn't touch its state anyways.
> >
> >I don't really understandt what problem this patch addresses.
> >There are
> >situations where we have events to reinject into the l2 guest
> >directly.
> >But the generic reinjection code works fine for it.
> >The only problematic thing with it is that it implicitly relies on
> >exit_int_info not to be changed in the exit cycle (which would be
> >worth
> >a comment).
>
> It simply tries to be too clever. Reevaluating exceptions won't work
> for example.
>
Can you elaborate? What do you mean by "too clever" and why reevaluating
exceptions won't work?
--
Gleb.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-23 8:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-18 13:00 [PATCH 0/5] Nested SVM Interrupt Fixes Alexander Graf
2009-09-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 1/5] Implement #NMI exiting for nested SVM Alexander Graf
2009-09-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 2/5] Don't call svm_complete_interrupts for nested guests Alexander Graf
2009-09-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 3/5] Don't #VMEXIT(INTR) if we still have event_inj waiting Alexander Graf
2009-09-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 4/5] Don't bail when injecting an event in nested SVM Alexander Graf
2009-09-18 13:00 ` [PATCH 5/5] Notify nested hypervisor of lost event injections Alexander Graf
2009-09-23 1:22 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-09-27 14:18 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-09-23 1:39 ` [PATCH 3/5] Don't #VMEXIT(INTR) if we still have event_inj waiting Joerg Roedel
2009-09-23 8:09 ` Alexander Graf
2009-09-18 13:39 ` [PATCH 2/5] Don't call svm_complete_interrupts for nested guests Jan Kiszka
2009-09-23 1:26 ` Joerg Roedel
2009-09-23 8:04 ` Alexander Graf
2009-09-23 8:05 ` Alexander Graf
2009-09-23 8:28 ` Gleb Natapov [this message]
2009-09-18 13:33 ` [PATCH 1/5] Implement #NMI exiting for nested SVM Jan Kiszka
2009-09-18 15:44 ` Alexander Graf
2009-09-18 16:01 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-09-23 1:06 ` Joerg Roedel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090923082819.GV23157@redhat.com \
--to=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).