Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: ioapic: Update state only after successful delivery

"Huang, Kai" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.kvm
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, 2026-08-10 at 14:17 +0800, Hao Zhang wrote:
> From: Hao Zhang <[email protected]>
> 
> The I/O APIC tracks delivered interrupts in state that is later used to
> decide whether an interrupt is still pending or blocked waiting for an
> EOI.
> 
> For level-triggered interrupts, remote_irr means that a local APIC
> accepted the interrupt and that the I/O APIC must wait for the
> corresponding EOI before delivering the interrupt again.  For
> edge-triggered interrupts, irr_delivered is used to hide delivered
> interrupts from KVM_GET_IRQCHIP so that userspace does not reinject an
> interrupt that has already left the I/O APIC.
> 
> But ioapic_service() currently updates that state before or without
> checking that interrupt delivery actually succeeded.
> kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic() can return -1 when no destination is found.
> Treating failed delivery as success can either leave a level-triggered
> pin blocked forever waiting for an EOI that will never be generated, or
> cause KVM_GET_IRQCHIP to drop an undelivered edge-triggered interrupt
> from the saved IRR state.
> 
> Update I/O APIC delivery state only when the delivery result is positive,
> i.e. when at least one local APIC accepted the interrupt.
> 
> Fixes: 4925663a079c ("KVM: Report IRQ injection status to userspace.")
> Fixes: 5bda6eed2e36 ("KVM: ioapic: Record edge-triggered interrupts delivery status")
> Signed-off-by: Hao Zhang <[email protected]>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
>  - Address Kai Huang's review by deferring both remote_irr and
>    irr_delivered updates until interrupt delivery succeeds.
>  - Extend the selftest to cover failed edge-triggered delivery and verify
>    that the interrupt remains pending in IRR.
> 
> Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
> 
>  arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c | 11 ++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c
> index 757667fb2bfa..540e5665fbe4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/ioapic.c
> @@ -474,9 +474,6 @@ static int ioapic_service(struct kvm_ioapic *ioapic, int irq, bool line_status)
>  	irqe.shorthand = APIC_DEST_NOSHORT;
>  	irqe.msi_redir_hint = false;
>  
> -	if (irqe.trig_mode == IOAPIC_EDGE_TRIG)
> -		ioapic->irr_delivered |= 1 << irq;
> -
>  	if (irq == RTC_GSI && line_status) {
>  		/*
>  		 * pending_eoi cannot ever become negative (see
> @@ -491,8 +488,12 @@ static int ioapic_service(struct kvm_ioapic *ioapic, int irq, bool line_status)
>  	} else
>  		ret = kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic(ioapic->kvm, NULL, &irqe);
>  
> -	if (ret && irqe.trig_mode == IOAPIC_LEVEL_TRIG)
> -		entry->fields.remote_irr = 1;
> +	if (ret > 0) {
> +		if (irqe.trig_mode == IOAPIC_EDGE_TRIG)
> +			ioapic->irr_delivered |= 1 << irq;
> +		else if (irqe.trig_mode == IOAPIC_LEVEL_TRIG)
> +			entry->fields.remote_irr = 1;
> +	}
> 

Ah looking at this I immediately realized I misread the code, that I thought the
irr_delivered was for level triggered as well, but actually it is for edge
triggered.  I guess we both got it wrong :-)

For edge triggered IRQ the existing code is correct I believe, since once the
function is called the IRQ is considered delivered no matter whether it is
actually accepted by LAPIC.  I think this exactly reflects the hardware
behaviour.  (In fact, in ioapic_set_irq() you can see the IRQ is removed from
irr_delivered for edge triggered right before ioapic_service() is called.)

For level triggered, I don't see ioapic->irr is cleared by KVM, but only cleared
when ioapic_set_irq() is called with irq_level == 0.  I now (AFAICT) realize it
is the right behaviour since it should be the driver which dessert the level to
stop the level-triggered IRQ.

So in short, I think your v1 is correct, and sorry about my noise. :-(
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.