Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] KVM: X86: Let's harden the ipi fastpath condition
 edge-trigger mode
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
References: <1623050385-100988-1-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com>
 <1623050385-100988-3-git-send-email-wanpengli@tencent.com>
 <YL+cX8K3r7EWrk33@google.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <2a643f94-d159-c1ac-6bd2-cc6b45372630@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Jun 2021 19:40:52 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <YL+cX8K3r7EWrk33@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 08/06/21 18:35, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Related side topic, anyone happen to know if KVM (and Qemu's) emulation of IPIs
> intentionally follows AMD instead of Intel?  I suspect it's unintentional,
> especially since KVM's initial xAPIC emulation came from Intel.  Not that it's
> likely to matter, but allowing level-triggered IPIs is bizarre, e.g. getting an
> EOI sent to the right I/O APIC at the right time via a level-triggered IPI seems
> extremely convoluted.

QEMU traditionally followed AMD a bit more than Intel for historical 
reasons.  Probably the code went QEMU->Xen->KVM even though it was 
contributed by Intel.

Paolo