On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 07:42:33AM +, Xuquan (Quan Xu) wrote:
>On March 01, 2017 2:24 PM, wrote:
>>
>>Good point. I ignore v->processor maybe change. I have thought over
>> __vmx_deliver_posted_interrupt() again and want to share you my opinion.
>>First of all, __vmx_deliver_posted_interrupt()
On March 01, 2017 2:24 PM, wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 12:38:39AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 01.03.17 at 04:23, wrote:
>>> On February 28, 2017 11:08 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 27.02.17 at 11:53, wrote:
> If guest is already in non-root mode, an posted interrupt will be
>>>
> From: Gao, Chao
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 2:24 PM
>
>
> Good point. I ignore v->processor maybe change. I have thought over
> __vmx_deliver_posted_interrupt() again and want to share you my
> opinion.
> First of all, __vmx_deliver_posted_interrupt() is to let the target
> vCPU sync PIR
>>> On 01.03.17 at 07:23, wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 12:38:39AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 01.03.17 at 04:23, wrote:
>>> Gone through the code, in_irq() means that the cpu is dispatching an
>>> interrupt..
>>> I am really hesitated whether to drop ' (in_irq() || (v != current)) ' o
On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 12:38:39AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.03.17 at 04:23, wrote:
>> On February 28, 2017 11:08 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 27.02.17 at 11:53, wrote:
If guest is already in non-root mode, an posted interrupt will be
directly delivered to guest (leaving
>>> On 01.03.17 at 04:23, wrote:
> On February 28, 2017 11:08 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 27.02.17 at 11:53, wrote:
>>> If guest is already in non-root mode, an posted interrupt will be
>>> directly delivered to guest (leaving softirq being set without
>>> actually incurring a VM-Exit - break
On February 28, 2017 11:08 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 27.02.17 at 11:53, wrote:
>> If guest is already in non-root mode, an posted interrupt will be
>> directly delivered to guest (leaving softirq being set without
>> actually incurring a VM-Exit - breaking desired softirq behavior).
>
>This i
>>> On 27.02.17 at 11:53, wrote:
> If guest is already in non-root mode, an posted interrupt will
> be directly delivered to guest (leaving softirq being set without
> actually incurring a VM-Exit - breaking desired softirq behavior).
This is irritating - are you describing a problem you mean to
>From 6b5f702927d832513d270a2bca4634b271f4df47 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Quan Xu
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 02:48:29 +0800
Subject: [PATCH v2] x86/apicv: enhance posted-interrupt processing
If guest is already in non-root mode, an posted interrupt will
be directly delivered to guest (leaving sof
