On 02/03/2011 06:14 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-03 16:58, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/03/2011 05:55 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>
>>> What's an interrupt window without IRET interception?
>>
>> I don't the details, but I thought you could get something like an
>> interrupt-window-open interception by (fake-)injecting an IRQ and
>> intercepting on VIRQ acceptance. That will not work if returning to and
>> staying in irq-disabled guest code, therefore the timeout, but it should
>> be most efficient (specifically if the guest uses NMIs for things like
>> perf).
>>
>
> Since NMIs are used to break out of irq-disabled regions (watchdog, NMI
> IPIs during reboots) I'm wary of such a solution.
Right, but we already use it for Intel. The timeout ensures that you
can't get stuck forever. I think Xen works this way as well (minus the
timeout - last time I checked).
Only without vnmi support, yes? In that case, we can't do any better.
In this case, we can, and we should, even at the expense of performance
or ridiculous complexity.
I hope AMD would finally realize what the left behind and improve it so
that we can declare whatever "nice" solution just a temporary
workaround. Will still take a few years, but we had the same situation
on Intel.
Me, too, except that I'd like a correct implementation on the existing
ISA. As time goes by, it becomes more and more difficult to declare
that all previous processors are an unimportant minority.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
