lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 3/3] KVM: VMX: Enable Notify VM exit
From


On 5/19/2022 6:30 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022, Chenyi Qiang wrote:
>> @@ -1504,6 +1511,8 @@ struct kvm_x86_ops {
>> * Returns vCPU specific APICv inhibit reasons
>> */
>> unsigned long (*vcpu_get_apicv_inhibit_reasons)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>> +
>> + bool has_notify_vmexit;
>
> I'm pretty sure I suggested this, but seeing it in code, it kinda sorta makes things
> worst if we don't first consolidate the existing flags. kvm_x86_ops works, but we'd
> definitely be taking liberties with the "ops" part.
>
> What about adding struct kvm_caps to collect these flags/settings that don't fit
> into kvm_cpu_caps because they're not a CPUID feature flag? kvm_x86_ops has the
> advantage of kinda being read-only after init since VMX modifies vmx_x86_ops,
> but IMO that's not enough reason to shove this into kvm_x86_ops. And long term,
> we might be able find a way to mark kvm_caps as full __ro_after_init.
>
> If no one objects, the attached patch can slide in before this patch, then
> has_notifiy_vmexit can land in kvm_caps.
>
> struct kvm_caps {
> /* control of guest tsc rate supported? */
> bool has_tsc_control;
> /* maximum supported tsc_khz for guests */
> u32 max_guest_tsc_khz;
> /* number of bits of the fractional part of the TSC scaling ratio */
> u8 tsc_scaling_ratio_frac_bits;
> /* maximum allowed value of TSC scaling ratio */
> u64 max_tsc_scaling_ratio;
> /* 1ull << kvm_caps.tsc_scaling_ratio_frac_bits */
> u64 default_tsc_scaling_ratio;
> /* bus lock detection supported? */
> bool has_bus_lock_exit;
>
> u64 supported_mce_cap;
> u64 supported_xcr0;
> u64 supported_xss;
> };
>

Thanks Sean for your patch. I think an unintentional change is mixed in it:

@@ -4739,7 +4725,8 @@ static int
kvm_vcpu_ready_for_interrupt_injection(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
return (kvm_arch_interrupt_allowed(vcpu) &&
kvm_cpu_accept_dm_intr(vcpu) &&
!kvm_event_needs_reinjection(vcpu) &&
- !vcpu->arch.exception.pending);
+ !vcpu->arch.exception.pending &&
+ !kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_TRIPLE_FAULT, vcpu));
}

Maybe this should belong to the patch 1?

>> @@ -6090,6 +6094,18 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_enable_cap(struct kvm *kvm,
>> }
>> mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
>> break;
>> + case KVM_CAP_X86_NOTIFY_VMEXIT:
>> + r = -EINVAL;
>> + if ((u32)cap->args[0] & ~KVM_X86_NOTIFY_VMEXIT_VALID_BITS)
>> + break;
>> + if (!kvm_x86_ops.has_notify_vmexit)
>> + break;
>> + if (!(u32)cap->args[0] & KVM_X86_NOTIFY_VMEXIT_ENABLED)
>> + break;
>> + kvm->arch.notify_window = cap->args[0] >> 32;
>
> Setting notify_vmexit and notify_vmexit_flags needs to be done under kvm->lock,
> and changing notify_window if kvm->created_vcpus > 0 needs to disallowed, otherwise
> init_vmcs() will use the wrong value.
>
> notify_vmexit_flags could be changed on the fly, but I doubt that's worth
> supporting as even the smallest amount of complexity will go unused.
>
> So I think this?
>

Make sense.

> case KVM_CAP_X86_NOTIFY_VMEXIT:
> r = -EINVAL;
> if ((u32)cap->args[0] & ~KVM_X86_NOTIFY_VMEXIT_VALID_BITS)
> break;
> if (!kvm_x86_ops.has_notify_vmexit)
> break;
> if (!(u32)cap->args[0] & KVM_X86_NOTIFY_VMEXIT_ENABLED)
> break;
> mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
> if (!kvm->created_vcpus) {
> kvm->arch.notify_window = cap->args[0] >> 32;
> kvm->arch.notify_vmexit_flags = (u32)cap->args[0];
> r = 0;
> }
> mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> break;

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-05-19 12:40    [W:0.106 / U:0.436 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site