From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36865 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pkw3p-0003ii-1M
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Feb 2011 05:05:10 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1Pkw3n-0000hM-M6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Feb 2011 05:05:08 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42597)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1Pkw3n-0000gw-5r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Feb 2011 05:05:07 -0500
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 08:04:07 -0200
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM: Windows 64-bit troubles with user space irqchip
Message-ID: <20110203100407.GA2449@amt.cnet>
References: <4D496A8D.90000@siemens.com> <4D496BC5.10807@redhat.com>
	<4D496D77.2010405@siemens.com> <4D496FA6.8070301@siemens.com>
	<4D49738D.7080404@redhat.com> <4D4979BD.6080900@siemens.com>
	<20110202154611.GR14984@redhat.com> <4D497DAB.7010901@siemens.com>
	<4D4A64F2.8010309@redhat.com> <4D4A7629.1010506@siemens.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4D4A7629.1010506@siemens.com>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 10:32:25AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-02-03 09:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 02/02/2011 05:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>  If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
> >>>  one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when interrupt, that should be
> >>>  handled, arrives?
> >>
> >> I'm not yet confident about the logic of the kernel patch: mov to cr8 is
> >> serializing. If the guest raises the tpr and then signals this with a
> >> succeeding, non vm-exiting instruction to the other vcpus, one of those
> >> could inject an interrupt with a higher priority than the previous tpr,
> >> but a lower one than current tpr. QEMU user space would accept this
> >> interrupt - and would likely surprise the guest. Do I miss something?
> > 
> > apic_get_interrupt() is only called from the vcpu thread, so it should 
> > see a correct tpr.
> > 
> > The only difference I can see with the patch is that we may issue a 
> > spurious cpu_interrupt().  But that shouldn't do anything bad, should it?
> 
> I tested this yesterday, and it doesn't confuse Windows. It actually
> receives quite a few spurious IRQs in normal operation, w/ or w/o the
> kernel's tpr optimization.

http://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@vger.kernel.org/msg41681.html

tpr of a vcpu should always be inspected in vcpu context, instead of 
iothread context?