Re: [PATCH 4/5] KVM: x86: Use kvm_get_vcpu() instead of open-coded access

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>]

On Tue, Nov 16, 2021, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 11/5/21 21:03, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > But I think even that is flawed, as APICv can be dynamically deactivated and
> > re-activated while the VM is running, and I don't see a path that re-updates
> > the IRTE when APICv is re-activated.  So I think a more conservative check is
> > needed, e.g.
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/posted_intr.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/posted_intr.c
> > index 5f81ef092bd4..6cf5b2e86118 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/posted_intr.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/posted_intr.c
> > @@ -272,7 +272,7 @@ int pi_update_irte(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned int host_irq, uint32_t guest_irq,
> > 
> >          if (!kvm_arch_has_assigned_device(kvm) ||
> >              !irq_remapping_cap(IRQ_POSTING_CAP) ||
> > -           !kvm_vcpu_apicv_active(kvm->vcpus[0]))
> > +           !irqchip_in_kernel(kvm) || !enable_apicv)
> >                  return 0;
> > 
> >          idx = srcu_read_lock(&kvm->irq_srcu);
> 
> What happens then if pi_pre_block is called and the IRTE denotes a posted
> interrupt?
> 
> I might be wrong, but it seems to me that you have to change all of the
> occurrences this way.  As soon as enable_apicv is set, you need to go
> through the POSTED_INTR_WAKEUP_VECTOR just in case.

Sorry, I didn't grok that at all.  All occurences of what?
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm