From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M0WG0-00073i-Vi
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 03:37:05 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M0WFw-0006yq-8b
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 03:37:04 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33799 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M0WFw-0006yh-5k
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 03:37:00 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:53823)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1M0WFv-00068o-Hu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2009 03:36:59 -0400
Message-ID: <49FD4996.9060606@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 10:36:54 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH  0/8] kvm: Fixes,
	cleanups and live	migration
References: <20090501211717.24514.23246.stgit@mchn012c.ww002.siemens.net>
	<49FB7A40.1020005@us.ibm.com> <20090502074041.GB7198@redhat.com>
	<49FC4F90.1030901@codemonkey.ws>
	<20090502172308.GA13933@redhat.com> <49FC9B39.4080408@redhat.com>
	<20090502200754.GB13933@redhat.com> <49FD3266.5050000@redhat.com>
	<20090503060502.GH9795@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090503060502.GH9795@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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.gnu.org/pipermail/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: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> I don't think it's necessary.  We can record the software interrupt at  
>> the end of the instruction that generated it, and give it higher  
>> priority than a pending external interrupt.  On vmx, decrement RIP and  
>> set entry instruction length = 1 before injection.
>>     
> And get wrong error value when exception happens during soft interrupt
> delivery? I don't like all those tricks. They work only if everything
> happens like you expected and breaks completely when it is not.
>
>   

Er, yes.

>>                                                     On svm, use EVENTINJ  
>> and forget about the instruction length.
>>
>>     
> On SVM we do not re-inject soft int/exception at all, but re-execute the
> offending instruction.
>   

Maybe we should unexecute the software interrupt instruction on Intel 
and get the same effect.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function