Re: [PATCH 0/2] Put AP into safe hlt-loop code on S3 path

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 10/11/2016 11:41, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> Here's an excerpt from the KVM trace:
> 
>>  CPU-23509 [002]  8406.908787: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 1: entering SMM, smbase 0x30000
>>  CPU-23509 [002]  8406.908836: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 1: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb3000
>>  CPU-23510 [003]  8406.908850: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 2: entering SMM, smbase 0x30000
>>  CPU-23510 [003]  8406.908881: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 2: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb5000
>>  CPU-23511 [001]  8406.908908: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 3: entering SMM, smbase 0x30000
>>  CPU-23511 [001]  8406.908941: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 3: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb7000
>>  CPU-23508 [005]  8406.908951: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 0: entering SMM, smbase 0x30000
>>  CPU-23508 [005]  8406.908989: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 0: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb1000
>>  CPU-23511 [001]  8406.920215: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 3: entering SMM, smbase 0x7ffb7000
>>  CPU-23509 [002]  8406.920225: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 1: entering SMM, smbase 0x7ffb3000
>>  CPU-23510 [003]  8406.920225: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 2: entering SMM, smbase 0x7ffb5000
>>  CPU-23508 [005]  8406.920227: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 0: entering SMM, smbase 0x7ffb1000
>>  CPU-23508 [005]  8406.920262: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 0: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb1000
>>  CPU-23511 [001]  8406.920263: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 3: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb7000
>>  CPU-23508 [005]  8407.020292: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 0: entering SMM, smbase 0x7ffb1000
>>  CPU-23509 [006]  8407.020338: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 1: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb3000
>>  CPU-23510 [003]  8407.020338: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 2: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb5000
>>  CPU-23508 [005]  8407.020338: kvm_enter_smm:        vcpu 0: leaving SMM, smbase 0x7ffb1000
> 
> It seems that VCPU#0 still leaves (and then re-enters) SMM while VCPU#1 and VCPU#2 are firmly in SMM.
> 
> So this series is a clear improvement, but something else remains amiss.
> 
> If I remove Jiewen's v2 series, and apply only this one, then the symptom shows up much less frequently, but it does exist:
> - With (Jiewen's v2 + this one), testing case 13, I hit the symptom on the second resume,
> - With just this set applied, I hit the symptom (= one AP disappearing from Linux after resume) only on the 24th resume.

Any trace I can look at?  What about case 14, with
PcdCpuSmmStaticPageTable=TRUE?

Paolo