lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [RFC PATCH v4 6/7] KVM: x86: Add a new guest_debug flag forcing exit to userspace
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 10:06 AM
> To: Kechen Lu <kechenl@nvidia.com>
> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org; pbonzini@redhat.com; chao.gao@intel.com;
> vkuznets@redhat.com; Somdutta Roy <somduttar@nvidia.com>; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 6/7] KVM: x86: Add a new guest_debug flag
> forcing exit to userspace
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2022, Kechen Lu wrote:
> > For debug and test purposes, there are needs to explicitly make
> > instruction triggered exits could be trapped to userspace. Simply add
> > a new flag for guest_debug interface could achieve this.
> >
> > This patch also fills the userspace accessible field
> > vcpu->run->hw.hardware_exit_reason for userspace to determine the
> > original triggered VM-exits.
>
> This patch belongs in a different series, AFAICT there are no dependencies
> between this and allowing per-vCPU disabling of exits. Allowing userspace to
> exit on "every" instruction exit is going to be much more controversial,
> largely because it will be difficult for KVM to provide a consistent, robust ABI.
> E.g. should KVM exit to userspace if an intercepted instruction is
> encountered by the emualtor?
>
> TL;DR: drop this patch from the next version.

Ack. This patch I introduced as prerequisite for the patch 7 of implementing the selftests for KVM_CAP_X86_DISABLE_EXITS. But yeah, it's not a good practice, I will try to think about a better way to implement the disabled exits testing.

BR,
Kechen

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-07-20 21:12    [W:0.071 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site