Please use tags in patches. We usually begin the subject with "KVM: x86:" when touching arch/x86/kvm/x86.c.
2017-05-24 13:48+0800, Zhuangyanying: > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > @@ -8394,7 +8394,8 @@ static inline bool kvm_vcpu_has_events(struct kvm_vcpu > *vcpu) > if (vcpu->arch.pv.pv_unhalted) > return true; > > - if (atomic_read(&vcpu->arch.nmi_queued)) > + if (vcpu->arch.nmi_pending || > + atomic_read(&vcpu->arch.nmi_queued)) > return true; Hm, I think we've been missing '&& kvm_x86_ops->nmi_allowed(vcpu)'. The undesired resume if we have suppressed NMI is not making it much worse, but wouldn't "kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu)" also work here? > if (kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_SMI, vcpu)) Thanks.
