Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <034401953bc935d997c143153938edb1034b52cd.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: fix task switch emulation on INTn instruction.
From:   Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>
To:     "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Thu, 14 Jul 2022 16:57:56 +0300
In-Reply-To: <52d44630-21ad-1291-4185-40d5728eaea6@maciej.szmigiero.name>
References: <20220714124453.188655-1-mlevitsk@redhat.com>
         <52d44630-21ad-1291-4185-40d5728eaea6@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.40.4 (3.40.4-5.fc34) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2022-07-14 at 15:50 +0200, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> On 14.07.2022 14:44, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > Recently KVM's SVM code switched to re-injecting software interrupt events,
> > if something prevented their delivery.
> > 
> > Task switch due to task gate in the IDT, however is an exception
> > to this rule, because in this case, INTn instruction causes
> > a task switch intercept and its emulation completes the INTn
> > emulation as well.
> > 
> > Add a missing case to task_switch_interception for that.
> > 
> > This fixes 32 bit kvm unit test taskswitch2.
> > 
> > Fixes: 7e5b5ef8dca322 ("KVM: SVM: Re-inject INTn instead of retrying the insn on "failure"")
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>
> > ---
> 
> That's a good catch, your patch looks totally sensible to me.
> People running Win 3.x or OS/2 on top of KVM will surely be grateful for it :)

Yes and also people who run 32 bit kvm unit tests :)

BTW, I do have a win98 VM which I run once in a while under KVM.
On Intel it works very well, on AMD, only works without NPT and without MMU
pre-fetching, due to fact that the OS doesn't correctly invalidate TLB entries.

I do need to test KVM with OS/2 on one of the weekends.... ;-)

Thanks for the review,
	Best regards,
		Maxim Levitsky

> 
> Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>
> 
> Thanks,
> Maciej
>