[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/vmx: Fix IRQ handling for EXIT_REASON_INIT
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2023 09:57:11 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=0lx2DBSHOCtaeXWsGPxrWeetRuva96p2S+AOcz1No1g=; b=QUZqGdmj/M6xKDAyughbw2VyJIuiATs92iYjcFBwUhSGmNqKW0L8J3HF0RM1IDWtaSR/BzDkiZJITPRprsYNMEnmjT6gp6K5RwhRQ+e8Gup/tDlnrB8agR3vtd/mKmYH7fqLcR5fdQyBu14Jljy31FTjKGR/mN5vtJyuEOHz0sUiqPbOqdQnOwlqajhksypMZKVz9ZMendVQbj1J0/dRGmKGJaRW8ZDZlR3hQkt0tngSdZ2n0F5F+mTqFi6OnjzaAEO+opu0rcroBdz0fdQXDuhJ+a4d761GtCv+9zdEoh+BGvB47+Qsmn+k+JaFv7ow9fDnk7T7c05jQSn9kMWbFw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=hZzWRhi4OwfASZB966pqSquMt4OhgHcKhWd3gxgYbYw0+nG+uFats6TFIElo3b9qSxl01bj4Eh3aQ+5b7MOBmpRdWxcsYxOPwBroSugz21Otv1XKgKqRx3FvisBlCTnEpTYb8/BKGi2nlkW5zWFaOG/tOMC/4MbPA0rAtTMrlBSdxpMC71FK9DOkHTjzZfq9C4M2VX5BUG7gUobs6IZQP2g2yV5ge4JAu+4d/T5AbRYoHVAAtc3B1oA0Yz6hPqLyS6v2Ria8kGplV0zxb6HjbWa66ymCw/pA256Ntx0AhJETyiuHEcqhy16Xrxbsx3UOD20Kdh7cSFHNv5hHkdoXrw==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Reima ISHII <ishiir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, Tamas K Lengyel <tamas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Takahiro Shinagawa <shina@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 02 Nov 2023 08:57:56 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 01.11.2023 20:20, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c
> @@ -4097,10 +4097,6 @@ void vmx_vmexit_handler(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
> case EXIT_REASON_MCE_DURING_VMENTRY:
> do_machine_check(regs);
> break;
> -
> - case EXIT_REASON_INIT:
> - printk(XENLOG_ERR "Error: INIT received - ignoring\n");
> - return; /* Renter the guest without further processing */
> }
Wouldn't the printk() better remain where it was, and just the "return" be
purged? Otherwise between here and ...
> @@ -4390,6 +4386,12 @@ void vmx_vmexit_handler(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
> case EXIT_REASON_TRIPLE_FAULT:
> hvm_triple_fault();
> break;
> +
> + case EXIT_REASON_INIT:
> + /* TODO: Turn into graceful shutdown. */
> + printk(XENLOG_ERR "Error: INIT received - ignoring\n");
> + break;
... here there are various paths which bypass the main switch(), and hence
there would be no trace left of the unexpected INIT in certain cases.
Jan
|
