On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 03:16:46PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> As the processor may not consider GUEST_INTR_STATE_STI as a reason for
> blocking NMI, it could return immediately with EXIT_REASON_NMI_WINDOW
> when we asked for it. But as we consider this state as NMI-blocking, we
> can run into an endless loop.
>
> Resolve this by allowing NMI injection if just GUEST_INTR_STATE_STI is
> active (originally suggested by Gleb). Intel confirmed that this is
> safe, the processor will never complain about NMI injection in this
> state.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Gleb Natapov<[email protected]>
> KVM-Stable-Tag
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 3 +--
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> index 777e00d..fa3959b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> @@ -2824,8 +2824,7 @@ static int vmx_nmi_allowed(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> return 0;
>
> return !(vmcs_read32(GUEST_INTERRUPTIBILITY_INFO) &
> - (GUEST_INTR_STATE_STI | GUEST_INTR_STATE_MOV_SS |
> - GUEST_INTR_STATE_NMI));
> + (GUEST_INTR_STATE_MOV_SS | GUEST_INTR_STATE_NMI));
> }
>
> static bool vmx_get_nmi_mask(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
--
Gleb.
--
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
