From: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> To: Aravinda Prasad <aravinda@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, michaele@au1.ibm.com, mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com, agraf@suse.de, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 08:38:08 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <56459360.3090400@redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <5645828E.1030609@linux.vnet.ibm.com> On 13/11/15 07:26, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > > On Friday 13 November 2015 07:20 AM, David Gibson wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:22:29PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: [...] >>> So thinking whether qemu should explicitly enable the new NMI >>> behavior. >> >> So, I think the reasoning above tends towards having qemu control the >> MC behaviour. If qemu does nothing, MCs are delivered direct to >> 0x200, if it enables the new handling, they cause a KVM exit and qemu >> will deliver the MC. > > This essentially requires qemu to control how KVM behaves as KVM does > the actual redirection of MC either to guest's 0x200 vector or to exit > guest. So, if we are running new qemu, then KVM should exit guest and if > we are running old qemu, KVM should redirect MC to 0x200. Is there any > way to communicate this to KVM? ioctl? Simply introduce a KVM capability that can be enabled by userspace. See kvm_vcpu_ioctl_enable_cap() in arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c. Thomas
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> To: Aravinda Prasad <aravinda@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, michaele@au1.ibm.com, mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com, agraf@suse.de, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 07:38:08 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <56459360.3090400@redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <5645828E.1030609@linux.vnet.ibm.com> On 13/11/15 07:26, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > > On Friday 13 November 2015 07:20 AM, David Gibson wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:22:29PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: [...] >>> So thinking whether qemu should explicitly enable the new NMI >>> behavior. >> >> So, I think the reasoning above tends towards having qemu control the >> MC behaviour. If qemu does nothing, MCs are delivered direct to >> 0x200, if it enables the new handling, they cause a KVM exit and qemu >> will deliver the MC. > > This essentially requires qemu to control how KVM behaves as KVM does > the actual redirection of MC either to guest's 0x200 vector or to exit > guest. So, if we are running new qemu, then KVM should exit guest and if > we are running old qemu, KVM should redirect MC to 0x200. Is there any > way to communicate this to KVM? ioctl? Simply introduce a KVM capability that can be enabled by userspace. See kvm_vcpu_ioctl_enable_cap() in arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c. Thomas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-13 7:38 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2015-11-11 16:58 [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Exit guest upon fatal machine check exception Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-11 16:59 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 2:24 ` Daniel Axtens 2015-11-12 2:24 ` Daniel Axtens 2015-11-12 3:38 ` David Gibson 2015-11-12 3:38 ` David Gibson 2015-11-12 4:32 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 4:44 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 4:43 ` David Gibson 2015-11-12 4:43 ` David Gibson 2015-11-12 17:52 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 17:52 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-13 1:50 ` David Gibson 2015-11-13 1:50 ` David Gibson 2015-11-13 6:26 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-13 6:38 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-13 7:38 ` Thomas Huth [this message] 2015-11-13 7:38 ` Thomas Huth 2015-11-13 11:25 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-13 11:37 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 4:58 ` Daniel Axtens 2015-11-12 4:58 ` Daniel Axtens 2015-11-12 17:22 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 17:34 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 21:37 ` Daniel Axtens 2015-11-12 21:37 ` Daniel Axtens 2015-11-13 4:58 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-13 4:59 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 3:34 ` David Gibson 2015-11-12 3:34 ` David Gibson 2015-11-12 5:18 ` Aravinda Prasad 2015-11-12 5:30 ` Aravinda Prasad
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=56459360.3090400@redhat.com \ --to=thuth@redhat.com \ --cc=agraf@suse.de \ --cc=aravinda@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \ --cc=dja@axtens.net \ --cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \ --cc=mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=michaele@au1.ibm.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.