Re: [PATCH] KVM: nVMX: Rework event injection and recovery

[Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 04:51:39PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-02-20 16:30, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 03:53:53PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2013-02-20 14:01, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> This aligns VMX more with SVM regarding event injection and recovery for
> >>> nested guests. The changes allow to inject interrupts directly from L0
> >>> to L2.
> >>>
> >>> One difference to SVM is that we always transfer the pending event
> >>> injection into the architectural state of the VCPU and then drop it from
> >>> there if it turns out that we left L2 to enter L1.
> >>>
> >>> VMX and SVM are now identical in how they recover event injections from
> >>> unperformed vmlaunch/vmresume: We detect that VM_ENTRY_INTR_INFO_FIELD
> >>> still contains a valid event and, if yes, transfer the content into L1's
> >>> idt_vectoring_info_field.
> >>>
> >>> To avoid that we incorrectly leak an event into the architectural VCPU
> >>> state that L1 wants to inject, we skip cancellation on nested run.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>
> >>> Survived moderate testing here and (currently) makes sense to me, but
> >>> please review very carefully. I wouldn't be surprised if I'm still
> >>> missing some subtle corner case.
> >>
> >> Forgot to point this out again: It still takes "KVM: nVMX: Fix injection
> >> of PENDING_INTERRUPT and NMI_WINDOW exits to L1" to make L0->L2
> >> injection work. So this patch logically depends on it.
> >>
> > But this patch has hunks from that patch.
> 
> Not mechanically.
> 
What do you mean?

> If you prefer me merging them together, let me know.
> 
For review not necessary, for applying preferably.

--
			Gleb.