[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: x86/vmx: Don't spuriously crash the domain when INIT is received
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 09:44:24 +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=/iyaoknACxl0d6KOSX3tULqJRL9tvjvk7Oa3iw/mrck=; b=amuI7sERtQ3q0DGSnF5qvTQvsuAVdKXLHB8m1nY7/ZAB5694cQxysevxk+QVDrQMDspMxu1VEAlyNKGKFXlDYz/BNSga7TroVquXWV09hyDpBWzo4zu1W44mHku7CdkHUVw/apmX1gH6W+x/nBXKUHzC08AcJ0i5CYJaavsaKLPhYNlVqKBwxVavyokNaJu3txs7VLl76jG7RKaByUrZNmla0RsfhfWqBfEzFd0lFIjR02/WDUyqdFuZnmdN9943xw6iqpH2xeQjWsf1C46+bUvIMVMVHJIHttyOz/SC9Nim11b9gttp4mBURWhqe5P3+r9tvAJ//V5/XCA1/bmy7A==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=HtNHkJBnL7SioBm2g3W553qw92Ev6FvMNM0xHsgUYJez5pkXh8415UhvIGMkoKjyxok/Jq4z3BfPtzVNKZnDPzLVVdHaCItzbv2HNVGk3shbIPU/tc/mZym0kwdk9IRYzz1allbXwSvYRELGO2VKU+UeZsxMeAabGI0bqaKbfaWAdWNIhJ/JereDeuxG8wW19xdoBFXd3JEz1zZoZEWNNXlKM9ydDyR70IwdV+e+QLFuOU+uLhXx0SzT47bNFMtgOFZcPYglPfFZxChDCSG7VDu2MLFp3+qYFaJ61aEOB0euesI/jrQv+L0yg94TZZgZZCMnNmWYxEPOBUvRgU99qQ==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, Thiner Logoer <logoerthiner1@xxxxxxx>, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 08:44:33 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> In VMX operation, the handling of INIT IPIs is changed. EXIT_REASON_INIT has
> nothing to do with the guest in question, simply signals that an INIT was
> received.
>
> Ignoring the INIT is probably the wrong thing to do, but is helpful for
> debugging. Crashing the domain which happens to be in context is definitely
> wrong. Print an error message and continue.
>
> Discovered as collateral damage from when an AP triple faults on S3 resume on
> Intel TigerLake platforms.
I'm afraid I don't follow the scenario, which was (only) outlined in
patch 1: Why would the BSP receive INIT in this case? And it also
cannot be that the INIT was received by the vCPU while running on
another CPU: With APs not coming back up, it cannot have been
scheduled to run there. And it would have been de-scheduled before
suspending (i.e. before any INITs are sent).
Jan
|
