From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [RFC Patch v2 45/45] x86/hvm: Always set pending event injection when loading VMC[BS] state. Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 09:54:55 +0100 Message-ID: <53FEEE5F.2090404@citrix.com> References: <1407481305-19808-1-git-send-email-wency@cn.fujitsu.com> <1407481305-19808-46-git-send-email-wency@cn.fujitsu.com> <53FCCB9B020000780002DC22@mail.emea.novell.com> <53FD2A6E.2010702@cn.fujitsu.com> <53FDF200.90408@amd.com> <53FE8014.804@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <53FE8014.804@cn.fujitsu.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Wen Congyang , Aravind Gopalakrishnan , Jan Beulich Cc: Kevin Tian , Yang Hongyang , Ian Campbell , Dong Eddie , Ian Jackson , Tim Deegan , Jun Nakajima , Boris Ostrovsky , xen devel , suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, Lai Jiangshan List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 28/08/14 02:04, Wen Congyang wrote: > At 08/27/2014 10:58 PM, Aravind Gopalakrishnan Write: >> On 8/26/2014 7:46 PM, Wen Congyang wrote: >>> At 08/27/2014 12:02 AM, Jan Beulich Write: >>>>>>> On 08.08.14 at 09:01, wrote: >>>>> In colo mode, secondary vm is running, so VM_ENTRY_INTR_INFO may >>>>> valid before restoring vmcs. If there is no pending event after >>>>> restoring vm, we should clear it. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang >>>>> >>>>> Also clear pending software exceptions. >>>>> Copy the fix to SVM as well. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Tim Deegan >>>> I only now realized that it's no surprise we're not getting acks from >>>> the VMX maintainers on this - the majority of them wasn't Cc-ed. >>>> Now done, but please take care to do so yourself in the future. >>>> >>>> As to the SVM maintainers - Ping (I Cc-ed you on an earlier reply)? >>> Thanks for doing this. >>> I have repost it in the bugfix patchset, and cc vmx and svm maintainers >>> >> Hi, >> Apologies for the delay. >> >> As for the svm changes, the patch seems fairly straightforward and harmless. >> However, I am not familiar with 'colo mode', so I'm not sure I understand the problem.. > In colo mode, secondary vm runs like this: > 1. suspend > 2. update the vm's state(All state is transfered from primary) > 3. resume Is this accurate? From previous review, I seem to remember that you are pausing the vm, not suspending it, which is where all of these event issues derive from. ~Andrew