From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@kernel.org>, Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>,
Zhang Yang <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] KVM: nVMX: nested TPR shadow/threshold emulation
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:42:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53F45177.9000706@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140820065914.GA11546@kernel>
Il 20/08/2014 08:59, Wanpeng Li ha scritto:
>
> + /*
> + * Failing the vm entry is _not_ what the processor does
> + * but it's basically the only possibility we have.
* We could still enter the guest if CR8 load exits are
* enabled, CR8 store exits are enabled, and virtualize APIC
* access is disabled; in this case the processor would never
* use the TPR shadow and we could simply clear the bit from
* the execution control. But such a configuration is useless,
* so let's keep the code simple.
> + */
> + if (!vmx->nested.virtual_apic_page)
> + nested_vmx_failValid(vcpu, VMXERR_ENTRY_INVALID_CONTROL_FIELD);
I thought so, but I'm afraid it's too late to do nested_vmx_failValid
here.
Without a test case, I'd be more confident if you moved the
nested_release_page/nested_get_page to a separate function, that
nested_vmx_run calls before enter_guest_mode. The same function can
map apic_access_page too, for cleanliness. Something like this:
if (cpu_has_secondary_exec_ctrls() &&
nested_cpu_has(vmcs12,
CPU_BASED_ACTIVATE_SECONDARY_CONTROLS) &&
(vmcs12->secondary_vm_exec_control &
SECONDARY_EXEC_VIRTUALIZE_APIC_ACCESSES)) {
if (vmx->nested.apic_access_page) /* shouldn't happen */
nested_release_page(vmx->nested.apic_access_page);
vmx->nested.apic_access_page =
nested_get_page(vcpu, vmcs12->apic_access_addr);
}
if (...) {
/* do the same for virtual_apic_page if CPU_BASED_TPR_SHADOW
is set... */
/*
* Failing the vm entry is _not_ what the processor does
* but it's basically the only possibility we have.
* We could still enter the guest if CR8 load exits are
* enabled, CR8 store exits are enabled, and virtualize APIC
* access is disabled; in this case the processor would never
* use the TPR shadow and we could simply clear the bit from
* the execution control. But such a configuration is useless,
* so let's keep the code simple.
*/
if (!vmx->nested.virtual_apic_page)
return -EFAULT;
}
return 0;
...
Then nested_vmx_run can do the nested_vmx_failValid if the function returns
an error.
Paolo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-20 7:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-19 8:30 [PATCH v4] KVM: nVMX: nested TPR shadow/threshold emulation Wanpeng Li
2014-08-19 8:34 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-08-20 6:59 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-08-20 7:42 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
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=53F45177.9000706@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=bsd@redhat.com \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpeng.li@linux.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