public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Update instruction length on intercepted BP
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 13:15:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100214111544.GJ2511@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B77D4DE.3030602@web.de>

On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 11:47:58AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 11:26:31AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 10:31:12AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> We intercept #BP while in guest debugging mode. As VM exists due to
> >>>> intercepted exceptions do not necessarily come with valid
> >>>> idt_vectoring, we have to update event_exit_inst_len explicitly in such
> >>>> cases. At least in the absence of migration, this ensures that
> >>>> re-injections of #BP will find and use the correct instruction length.
> >>>>
> >>> event_exit_inst_len is only used for event reinjection. Since event
> >>> intercepted here will not be reinjected why updating event_exit_inst_len
> >>> is needed here?
> >> In guest debugging mode a #BP exception is always reported to user space
> >> to find out what caused it. If it was the guest itself, the exception is
> >> reinjected, on older kernels via KVM_SET_GUEST_DEBUG and since 2.6.33
> >> via KVM_SET_VCPU_EVENTS (the latter requires some qemu patch that I will
> >> post later).
> >>
> >> As we currently do not update event_exit_inst_len on #BP exits,
> >> reinjecting fails unless event_exit_inst_len happens to be 1 from some
> >> other exit.
> >>
> > Hmm, how does it work on SVM then where we do not have
> > event_exit_inst_len so execution will resume on the same rip that caused
> > #BP after event reinjection?
> > 
> 
> Maybe not at all. I don't think I've tested this scenario on amd so far.
> Guess it needs some special handling in svm to move rip after the int3
> when requesting to inject #BP.
> 
This will work for VMX too, no? So may be we should design something
that will work for both VMX and SVM before applying patches that make
oly VMX work? How about disabling #BP intercept and reenter guest (may
be single step it at this point to reenable #BP interception ASAP)?

PS: moving rip after int3 may lead to wrong rip to be pushed on
exception stack if exception happens during event delivery.

--
			Gleb.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-14 11:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-13  9:31 [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Update instruction length on intercepted BP Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14  7:53 ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-14 10:26   ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14 10:34     ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-14 10:47       ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14 11:15         ` Gleb Natapov [this message]
2010-02-14 11:39           ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14 14:16             ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-14 16:38               ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14 16:44                 ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-14 17:06                   ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-15  6:48                     ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-14 14:45             ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-14 16:37               ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14 16:53                 ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-14 17:06                   ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14 17:26                     ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-14 17:49                       ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-15 13:20                         ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-15 13:30                           ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-15 14:25                             ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-17 11:11                             ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-17 11:13                               ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-17 11:24                                 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-17 12:39                                   ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-17 10:55                           ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-17 11:32                             ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-17 13:03                               ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-17 15:13                                 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-17 16:11                                   ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-16 11:20                         ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-16 11:25                           ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-14 12:27       ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-14 12:39         ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14 12:43           ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-14 12:47             ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-14 12:53               ` Gleb Natapov
2010-02-14 13:23               ` Jan Kiszka
2010-02-14 13:29                 ` Jan Kiszka

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=20100214111544.GJ2511@redhat.com \
    --to=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@web.de \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    /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