On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 02:23:59PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:11:47PM +0000, Zhang, Yang Z wrote: > > Gleb Natapov wrote on 2013-03-19: > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 09:31:11PM +0800, Yang Zhang wrote: > > >> From: Yang Zhang <[email protected]> > > >> > > >> If posted interrupt is avaliable, then uses it to inject virtual > > >> interrupt to guest. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Yang Zhang <[email protected]> > > >> --- > > >> arch/x86/kvm/irq.c | 3 ++- > > >> arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- > > >> arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h | 1 + > > >> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 11 +++++++++++ > > >> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 4 ++++ > > >> 5 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/irq.c b/arch/x86/kvm/irq.c > > >> index 484bc87..5179988 100644 > > >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/irq.c > > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/irq.c > > >> @@ -81,7 +81,8 @@ int kvm_cpu_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *v) > > >> if (kvm_cpu_has_extint(v)) > > >> return 1; > > >> - return kvm_apic_has_interrupt(v) != -1; /* LAPIC */ > > >> + return (kvm_apic_has_interrupt(v) != -1) || > > >> + kvm_hwapic_has_interrupt(v); > > > That's incorrect. kvm_cpu_has_interrupt() should return true only it > > > there is IRR suitable to be injected, not just any IRR. > > > kvm_apic_has_interrupt() should call kvm_apic_update_irr(). > > You are right. > > > > >> } > > >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_cpu_has_interrupt); > > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c > > >> index b3ea50e..46c7310 100644 > > >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c > > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c > > >> @@ -713,7 +713,10 @@ static int __apic_accept_irq(struct kvm_lapic > > >> *apic, int > > > delivery_mode, > > >> } else > > >> apic_clear_vector(vector, apic->regs + > > >> APIC_TMR); > > >> - result = !apic_test_and_set_irr(vector, apic); > > >> + result = 1; > > >> + if (!kvm_x86_ops->deliver_posted_interrupt(vcpu, > > >> vector)) > > >> + result = !apic_test_and_set_irr(vector, apic); > > >> + > > >> trace_kvm_apic_accept_irq(vcpu->vcpu_id, delivery_mode, > > >> trig_mode, vector, !result); > > >> if (!result) { > > >> @@ -723,8 +726,10 @@ static int __apic_accept_irq(struct kvm_lapic > > >> *apic, int > > > delivery_mode, > > >> break; > > >> } > > >> - kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu); > > >> - kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); > > >> + if (!kvm_x86_ops->vm_has_apicv(vcpu->kvm)) { > > >> + kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu); > > >> + kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); > > >> + } > > >> break; > > > apicv code and non apicv code are completely different. What's the point > > > checking for apicv twice here? > > > Just do: > > > > > > if (kvm_x86_ops->deliver_posted_interrupt) > > > kvm_x86_ops->deliver_posted_interrupt(vcpu, vector) > > > else { > > > result = !apic_test_and_set_irr(vector, apic); > > > kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu); > > > kvm_vcpu_kick(vcpu); > > > } > > > > > > And set kvm_x86_ops->deliver_posted_interrupt only if apicv is enabled. > > > > > > Also rearrange patches so that APIC_TMR handling goes before posted > > > interrupt series. > > Sure. > > > > >> > > >> case APIC_DM_REMRD: @@ -1604,6 +1609,11 @@ int > > >> kvm_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) return highest_irr; } > > >> +bool kvm_hwapic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > >> +{ > > >> + return kvm_x86_ops->hwapic_has_interrupt(vcpu); > > >> +} > > >> + > > >> int kvm_apic_accept_pic_intr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > >> { > > >> u32 lvt0 = kvm_apic_get_reg(vcpu->arch.apic, APIC_LVT0); > > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h > > >> index e5327be..c6abc63 100644 > > >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h > > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.h > > >> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ int kvm_create_lapic(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > > >> void kvm_free_lapic(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > > >> > > >> int kvm_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); +bool > > >> kvm_hwapic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); int > > >> kvm_apic_accept_pic_intr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); int > > >> kvm_get_apic_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); void > > >> kvm_lapic_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); > > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > > >> index 0b5a8ae..48a2239 100644 > > >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c > > >> @@ -3932,6 +3932,17 @@ static void vmx_posted_intr_clear_on(struct > > > kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > >> clear_bit(POSTED_INTR_ON, (unsigned long > > >> *)&vmx->pi_desc.u.control); > > >> } > > >> +/* > > >> + * Send interrupt to vcpu via posted interrupt way. > > >> + * Return false if posted interrupt is not supported and the caller will > > >> + * roll back to old way(via set vIRR). > > >> + * Return true if posted interrupt is avalialbe, the interrupt is set > > >> + * in pir(posted interrupt requests): > > >> + * 1. If target vcpu is running(non-root mode), send posted interrupt > > >> + * notification to vcpu and hardware will sync pir to vIRR atomically. > > >> + * 2. If target vcpu isn't running(root mode), kick it to pick up the > > >> + * interrupt from pir in next vmentry. > > >> + */ > > > The comment should go into previous patch. Also I prefer to not check > > > for posted interrupt inside the callback, but set it to NULL instead. > > > This way we avoid calling a callback on a hot path needlessly. > > It's make sense. So just follow the logic you mentioned above? > > > Yes. > > > >> static bool vmx_deliver_posted_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int > > >> vector) > > >> { > > >> struct vcpu_vmx *vmx = to_vmx(vcpu); > > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > >> index 0baa90d..0981100 100644 > > >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > >> @@ -2679,6 +2679,7 @@ void kvm_arch_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > >> static int kvm_vcpu_ioctl_get_lapic(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > > >> > > >> struct kvm_lapic_state *s) { + kvm_x86_ops->sync_pir_to_irr(vcpu); > > >> memcpy(s->regs, vcpu->arch.apic->regs, sizeof *s); > > >> > > >> return 0; @@ -5699,6 +5700,7 @@ static int > > >> vcpu_enter_guest(struct > > >> kvm_vcpu *vcpu) } > > >> > > >> if (kvm_check_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu) || req_int_win) { > > >> + kvm_x86_ops->sync_pir_to_irr(vcpu); > > >> inject_pending_event(vcpu); > > >> > > >> /* enable NMI/IRQ window open exits if needed */ > > >> @@ -5741,6 +5743,8 @@ static int vcpu_enter_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > >> > > >> local_irq_disable(); > > >> + kvm_x86_ops->posted_intr_clear_on(vcpu); > > >> + > > > Why is this separate from pir_to_irr syncing? > > This is the result of discussion with Marcelo. > > It is more reasonable to put it here to avoid unnecessary posted interrupt > > between: > > > > vcpu->mode = IN_GUEST_MODE; > > > > <--interrupt may arrived here and this is unnecessary. > > > > local_irq_disable(); > > > > But this still can happen as far as I see: > > vcpu0 vcpu1: > pi_test_and_set_pir() > kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT) > if (KVM_REQ_EVENT) > sync_pir_to_irr() ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > vcpu->mode = IN_GUEST_MODE; > if (vcpu->mode == IN_GUEST_MODE) > if (!pi_test_and_set_on()) > apic->send_IPI_mask() > --> IPI arrives here > local_irq_disable(); > posted_intr_clear_on() > > > May be move vcpu->mode = IN_GUEST_MODE after local_irq_disable()?
Scenario is correct because injected PIR has been synced to IRR before guest entry. -- 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
