On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 10:07:58PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > This code is reached from kvm_cpu_get_interrupt(), but this function will
> > not be called in above scenario.
>
> I think I see. So this shall fix it also makes code cleaner
> (no -2 hack). Right? kvm_apic_has_interrupt is called correct?
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> index b4f7013..5a38e34 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> @@ -1273,8 +1273,12 @@ int kvm_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> highest_irr = apic_find_highest_irr(apic);
> if (highest_irr == -1)
> return -1;
> - if (((highest_irr & 0xF0) <= apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI)))
> - return -2;
> + /* Detect interrupt nesting and disable EOI optimization */
> + if ((highest_irr & 0xF0) <= apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI)) {
> + if (pv_eoi_enabled(vcpu))
> + pv_eoi_clr_pending(vcpu);
> + return -1;
> + }
> return highest_irr;
> }
>
I do not like it. kvm_apic_has_interrupt() does not suppose to mutate
state.
> @@ -1306,10 +1310,6 @@ int kvm_get_apic_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> int vector = kvm_apic_has_interrupt(vcpu);
> struct kvm_lapic *apic = vcpu->arch.apic;
>
> - /* Detect interrupt nesting and disable EOI optimization */
> - if (pv_eoi_enabled(vcpu) && vector == -2)
> - pv_eoi_clr_pending(vcpu);
> -
> if (vector < 0)
> return -1;
>
--
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
