Sheng Yang wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 October 2008 22:27:49 Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Aligning in-kernel kvm_apic_accept_pic_intr with its user space mate,
>> this patch relaxes the conditions under which PIC IRQs are accepted
>> by LVT0. This reflects reality and allows to reuse the service for the
>> NMI watchdog use case.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 13 ++++---------
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> Index: b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> @@ -1072,16 +1072,11 @@ int kvm_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vc
>> int kvm_apic_accept_pic_intr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>> u32 lvt0 = apic_get_reg(vcpu->arch.apic, APIC_LVT0);
>> - int r = 0;
>>
>> - if (vcpu->vcpu_id == 0) {
>> - if (!apic_hw_enabled(vcpu->arch.apic))
>> - r = 1;
>> - if ((lvt0 & APIC_LVT_MASKED) == 0 &&
>> - GET_APIC_DELIVERY_MODE(lvt0) == APIC_MODE_EXTINT)
>> - r = 1;
>> - }
>> - return r;
>> + if (!apic_hw_enabled(vcpu->arch.apic) ||
>> + (lvt0 & APIC_LVT_MASKED) == 0)
>> + return 1;
>> + return 0;
>> }
>>
>> void kvm_inject_apic_timer_irqs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>
> (sorry for late review...)
>
> Thanks to find out the root cause of BSOD!
>
> But I am a little concern about this change. As you know, PIC only connect to
> cpu0. So I think it's not proper to make it generic.
I don't think so - and if it were true, qemu would have a bug then, see
its corresponding code.
>
> Maybe you can use kvm_apic_accept_pic_intr(vcpu0) in later patch?
Sorry, don't get what you mean with this (independent of the above).
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
