@@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ static u8 count_vectors(void *bitmap)
bool __kvm_apic_update_irr(unsigned long *pir, void *regs, int *max_irr)
{
- unsigned long pir_vals[NR_PIR_WORDS];
+ unsigned long pir_vals[NR_PIR_WORDS], pending = 0;
u32 *__pir = (void *)pir_vals;
u32 i, vec;
u32 irr_val, prev_irr_val;
@@ -668,6 +668,13 @@ bool __kvm_apic_update_irr(unsigned long *pir, void *regs, int *max_irr)
for (i = 0; i < NR_PIR_WORDS; i++) {
pir_vals[i] = READ_ONCE(pir[i]);
+ pending |= pir_vals[i];
+ }
+
+ if (!pending)
+ return false;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < NR_PIR_WORDS; i++) {
if (!pir_vals[i])
continue;
Rework KVM's processing of the PIR to use the same algorithm as posted MSIs, i.e. to do READ(x4) => XCHG(x4) instead of (READ+XCHG)(x4). Given KVM's long-standing, sub-optimal use of 32-bit accesses to the PIR, it's safe to say far more thought and investigation was put into handling the PIR for posted MSIs, i.e. there's no reason to assume KVM's existing logic is meaningful, let alone superior. Matching the processing done by posted MSIs will also allow deduplicating the code between KVM and posted MSIs. See the comment for handle_pending_pir() added by commit 1b03d82ba15e ("x86/irq: Install posted MSI notification handler") for details on why isolating loads from XCHG is desirable. Suggested-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> --- arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)