lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] Reanme the definitions of INTERRUPT_PENDING, NMI_PENDING and TSC_OFFSETING
From
Date
On 06/12/19 21:47, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> When reading the codes, I find the definitions of interrupt-window exiting
>> and nmi-window exiting don't match the names in latest intel SDM.
> I prefer KVM's names even though they diverge from the SDM. The "window
> exiting" terminology is very literal, which is desirable for the SDM
> because it doesn't leave any wiggle room. But for software, IMO the
> "event pending" terminology is preferable as it's more descriptive of the
> intended use of the control, e.g. KVM sets VIRTUAL_{INTR,NMI}_PENDING when
> it has a virtual event to inject and clears it after injecting said event.
>

On the other hand:

static void enable_irq_window(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
exec_controls_setbit(to_vmx(vcpu), CPU_BASED_VIRTUAL_INTR_PENDING);
}

static void enable_nmi_window(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
if (!enable_vnmi ||
vmcs_read32(GUEST_INTERRUPTIBILITY_INFO) & GUEST_INTR_STATE_STI) {
enable_irq_window(vcpu);
return;
}

exec_controls_setbit(to_vmx(vcpu), CPU_BASED_VIRTUAL_NMI_PENDING);
}

so we're already using a lot the "window" nomenclature in KVM. I've applied Xiaoyao's patches.

Paolo

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-09 16:25    [W:0.048 / U:0.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site