From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Cc: ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, wei.liu2@citrix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.8] libxc/x86: Report consistent initial APIC value for PV guests
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 15:08:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f4b60e10-9fc6-9b93-3dda-1b54d3d976b9@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <555c02d3-b112-5d88-9ff0-b73c89d71ca7@oracle.com>
On 10/11/16 15:05, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 11/10/2016 09:55 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 10/11/16 14:50, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> Currently hypervisor provides PV guest's CPUID(1).EBX[31:24] (initial
>>> APIC ID) with contents of that field on the processor that launched
>>> the guest. This results in the guest reporting different initial
>>> APIC IDs across runs.
>>>
>>> We should be consistent in how this value is reported, let's set
>>> it to 0 (which is also what Linux guests expect).
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
>> This surely wants to go along with:
> Probably, although Linux PV always reports APIC ID as zero (whole PV
> APIC is a mess there as it is tied to topology discovery and we don't do
> this well, to put it charitably).
If PV linux always overrides this to 0, why do you need the toolstack
fix in the first place?
>
>> andrewcoop@andrewcoop:/local/xen.git/xen$ git diff
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
>> index b51b51b..bdf9339 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
>> @@ -985,6 +985,10 @@ void pv_cpuid(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>> uint32_t tmp, _ecx, _ebx;
>>
>> case 0x00000001:
>> + /* Fix up VLAPIC details. */
>> + b &= 0x00FFFFFFu;
>> + b |= (curr->vcpu_id * 2) << 24;
> Do we also need to multiply by two for PV guests? Or is it just to be
> consistent with HVM?
Frankly, until I get CPUID phase 2 sorted, this is all held together
with good wishes, rather than duck tape. I am astounded it has held
together this long.
HVM chooses an even APIC ID to prevent the VM thinking it has hyperthreads.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-10 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-10 14:50 [PATCH for-4.8] libxc/x86: Report consistent initial APIC value for PV guests Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 14:55 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-11-10 15:05 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 15:08 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2016-11-10 15:24 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 16:12 ` Jan Beulich
2016-11-10 16:24 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-11-10 16:24 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-11-11 15:16 ` Wei Liu
2016-11-11 15:32 ` Jan Beulich
2016-11-11 15:33 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-11-12 6:46 ` Wei Liu
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=f4b60e10-9fc6-9b93-3dda-1b54d3d976b9@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).