From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/4] KVM: async_pf: Force a nested vmexit if the injected #PF is async_pf
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 15:48:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3a51aef-ab0a-b29f-dfa0-5490518d6fcc@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170628133852.GA3261@potion>
On 28/06/2017 15:38, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> Radim, Wanpeng,
>>
>> the patch is nice now but I'm still not 100% sure about the live
>> migration part. Why do we need to pass nested_apf to userspace, but not
>> nested_apf_token?
>
> We do not need it for migration, but unavailable nested_apf_token
> already breaks checkpoint & restore from userspace ... I think the
> cleanest way would be to add a new paravirtual event for nested_apf.
> (Or just keep delaying the apf.)
Indeed. With Jim's plans to migrate nested virt data, I was wondering
if nested_apf and nested_apf_token would be better placed in that ioctl,
rather than GET/SET_VCPU_EVENTS.
Nested-virt migration is broken anyway until we have Jim's patches, so
there's little point in migrating nested_apf only. Do you agree?
> Migration does a "async-pf-broadcast" while setting the async-pf MSR on
> destination, which resumes all async-pf waiters.
> Userspace actually has to drop the async-pf event on migration, because
> the destination has invalid nested_apf_token. (It's a horrible design.)
Yes, this was my question essentially. I would still migrate
nested_apf_token (as part of nested virt state), and then clear it in
KVM when doing the async-pf broadcast.
Paolo
> nested_apf is not #PF: if we didn't pass nested_apf, then the exception
> would be injected as #PF to L2 after migration. (Local KVM could
> remember that the #PF is nested_apf and do some ugly hacks.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-28 13:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-28 12:25 [PATCH v6 0/4] KVM: async_pf: Fix async pf exception injection Wanpeng Li
2017-06-28 12:25 ` [PATCH v6 1/4] KVM: x86: Simple kvm_x86_ops->queue_exception parameter Wanpeng Li
2017-06-28 12:25 ` [PATCH v6 2/4] KVM: async_pf: Add L1 guest async_pf #PF vmexit handler Wanpeng Li
2017-06-28 12:25 ` [PATCH v6 3/4] KVM: async_pf: Force a nested vmexit if the injected #PF is async_pf Wanpeng Li
2017-06-28 12:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-06-28 13:38 ` Radim Krčmář
2017-06-28 13:48 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2017-06-28 14:09 ` Wanpeng Li
2017-06-28 14:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-06-28 14:17 ` Wanpeng Li
2017-06-28 14:20 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-06-28 14:23 ` Wanpeng Li
2017-06-28 12:25 ` [PATCH v6 4/4] KVM: async_pf: Let host know whether the guest support delivery async_pf as #PF vmexit Wanpeng Li
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=f3a51aef-ab0a-b29f-dfa0-5490518d6fcc@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpeng.li@hotmail.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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®