From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39569)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1Sinqa-0002Nw-2U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 10:31:29 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1SinqY-0001hj-Ax
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 10:31:27 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35527)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1SinqY-0001he-3D
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 10:31:26 -0400
Message-ID: <4FE724B6.8010607@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 17:31:18 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4FE4F56D.1020201@web.de> <4FE4F7F5.7030400@web.de>
	<20120623002259.GA13440@amt.cnet>
	<20120623090646.GA21908@amt.cnet> <4FE5AC75.1020504@web.de>
	<4FE6D4A6.9080708@redhat.com> <4FE71F44.9020800@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <4FE71F44.9020800@web.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] kvm: First step to push iothread lock out
 of inner run loop
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: Liu Ping Fan <pingfank@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>

On 06/24/2012 05:08 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-06-24 10:49, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 06/23/2012 02:45 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>
>>> Hmm, we may need the iothread lock around cpu_set_apic_tpr for
>>> !kvm_irqchip_in_kernel(). And as we are at it, apic_base manipulation
>>> can be but there as well.
>>>
>>> With in-kernel irqchip, there is no such need. Also, no one accesses
>>> eflags outside of the vcpu thread, independent of the irqchip mode.
>> 
>> In fact !kvm_irqchip_in_kernel() is broken wrt the tpr.  Interrupt
>> injection needs to be done atomically, but currently we check the tpr
>> from the injecting thread, which means the cpu thread can race with it.
>>  We need to move the check to the vcpu thread so that the guest vcpu is
>> halted.
> 
> So apic_set_irq basically needs to be deferred to vcpu context, right?
> Will have a look.

Correct. IIRC, the kernel's 0a5fff192388d2 made the problem much worse,
but did not create it.  It was either Vista or XP-64 which triggered the
problem reliably.  Copying Gleb in case he remembers more.

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