On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 07:13:01PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 12:43:45PM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > > Any example how software relies on such > > > > two-interrupts-queued-in-IRR/ISR behaviour? > > > Don't know about guests, but KVM relies on it to detect interrupt > > > coalescing. So if interrupt is set in IRR but not in PIR interrupt will > > > not be reported as coalesced, but it will be coalesced during PIR->IRR > > > merge. > > > > Yes, so: > > > > 1. IRR=1, ISR=0, PIR=0. Event: set_irq, coalesced=no. > > 2. IRR=0, ISR=1, PIR=0. Event: IRR->ISR transfer. > > 3. vcpu outside of guest mode. > > 4. IRR=1, ISR=1, PIR=0. Event: set_irq, coalesced=no. > > 5. vcpu enters guest mode. > > 6. IRR=1, ISR=1, PIR=1. Event: set_irq, coalesced=no. > > 7. HW transfers PIR into IRR. > > > > set_irq return value at 7 is incorrect, interrupt event was _not_ > > queued. > Not sure I understand the flow of events in your description correctly. As I > understand it at 4 set_irq() will return incorrect result. Basically > when PIR is set to 1 while IRR has 1 for the vector the value of > set_irq() will be incorrect.
At 4 it has not been coalesced: it has been queued to IRR. At 6 it has been coalesced: PIR bit merged into IRR bit. > Frankly I do not see how it can be fixed > without any race with present HW PIR design. At kvm_accept_apic_interrupt, check IRR before setting PIR bit, if IRR already set, don't set PIR. -- 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
