From: "Zhang Haoyu" <zhanghy@sangfor.com>
To: "Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>,
"Wang, Wei W" <wei.w.wang@intel.com>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] KVM: x86: reset RVI upon system reset
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 16:15:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201412111615355608149@sangfor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E0ABC9BA1@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com
Then?
>> On 05/11/2014 10:02, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
>>>> I think both are ok.
>>>> If we zero max_irr in vmx_set_rvi(), we still need this check:
>>>> if ((is_guest_mode(vcpu) && nested_exit_on_intr(vcpu)) || max_irr
>>>> ==
>>>> -1)
>>>
>>> No, I don't think we need to add this.
>>
>> You don't, because the code will look like:
>>
>> if (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && nested_exit_on_intr(vcpu))
>> return;
>> if (!is_guest_mode(vcpu)) {
>> vmx_set_rvi(max_irr);
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> if (max_irr == -1)
>> return;
>> and thus vmx_set_rvi() is never reached if is_guest_mode(vcpu) &&
>> !nested_exit_on_intr(vcpu).
>
>I don't think the above code is perfect. Since hwapic_irr_update() is a hot point, it's better to move the first check after the second check. In this case, Wei's patch looks more reasonable.
>
>>
>> I applied the lapic.c part of Wei's patch, and the vmx.c part of Tiejun's patch.
>>
>> Paolo
>
>
>Best regards,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-11 8:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-05 2:53 [PATCH] KVM: x86: reset RVI upon system reset Wei Wang
2014-11-05 6:13 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-11-05 7:39 ` Wang, Wei W
2014-11-05 8:06 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-11-05 8:50 ` Wang, Wei W
2014-11-05 9:02 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-11-05 10:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-06 1:08 ` Zhang, Yang Z
2014-12-11 8:15 ` Zhang Haoyu [this message]
2014-12-11 11:06 ` Zhang, Yang Z
2014-12-12 9:56 ` Zhang Haoyu
2014-12-12 10:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-15 1:52 ` Zhang Haoyu
2014-12-15 9:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-12-11 11:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=201412111615355608149@sangfor.com \
--to=zhanghy@sangfor.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=tiejun.chen@intel.com \
--cc=wei.w.wang@intel.com \
--cc=yang.z.zhang@intel.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