Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: Select lowest vCPU ID for aliased xAPIC IDs

[Sean Christopherson]

On Tue, Oct 27, 2026, Partha Sarathi Satapathy wrote:
> From: Alejandro Jimenez <alejandro.j.jimenez@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> When KVM_X2APIC_API_USE_32BIT_IDS is enabled, KVM's x2APIC hotplug
> quirk allows events to target a vCPU by its x2APIC ID while the vCPU
> is still in xAPIC mode.
> 
> In xAPIC mode, APIC IDs are truncated to eight bits. Consequently,
> vCPUs with distinct x2APIC IDs can share an effective physical APIC ID.
> KVM's x2APIC erratum specifies that an event targeting an aliased
> physical APIC ID is delivered only to the vCPU with the lowest vCPU ID.
> 
> However, the optimized physical APIC map does not guarantee lowest-ID
> selection. When rebuilding the map, KVM retains the first xAPIC-mode
> vCPU encountered for an aliased 8-bit xAPIC ID. Since vCPUs can be
> added in any order, that vCPU need not have the lowest vCPU ID.
> 
> For example, vCPU 19 has x2APIC ID 0x013 and vCPU 275 has x2APIC ID
> 0x113. Both expose xAPIC ID 0x13 while in xAPIC mode. If vCPU 275 is
> created before vCPU 19, the map retains:
> 
>   phys_map[0x13] = vCPU 275
> 
> An INIT/SIPI targeting physical destination 0x13 then starts vCPU 275
> instead of vCPU 19. vCPU 275 executes the secondary startup path for
> the firmware CPU entry with APIC ID 0x013. After vCPU 275 enables
> x2APIC, Linux observes APIC ID 0x113 and reports:
> 
>   Firmware: 13 APIC: 113
> 
> KVM hardcodes a vCPU's x2APIC ID to its vCPU ID. When populating an
> aliased legacy xAPIC entry, retain the vCPU with the lowest vCPU ID.
> This makes optimized-map selection independent of vCPU-add order.

I'm genuinely curious.  What VMM adds vCPUs in a "random" order?  I agree a fix
is needed, as KVM should be internally consistent (kvm_apic_match_physical_addr()
will always try to match the truncated ID).  But this also makes me wonder exactly
what userspace is doing, and why.

> The separate full-ID entry remains unaffected, and destination 0x113
> continues to select vCPU 275.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Jimenez <alejandro.j.jimenez@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Partha Sarathi Satapathy <partha.satapathy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> index 1597dd0b0cc6..5dedffddebec 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> @@ -245,7 +245,9 @@ static int kvm_recalculate_phys_map(struct kvm_apic_map *new,
>  		if (apic_x2apic_mode(apic) || x2apic_id > 0xff)
>  			new->phys_map[x2apic_id] = apic;
>  
> -		if (!apic_x2apic_mode(apic) && !new->phys_map[xapic_id])
> +		if (!apic_x2apic_mode(apic) &&
> +		    (!new->phys_map[xapic_id] ||
> +		     x2apic_id < new->phys_map[xapic_id]->vcpu->vcpu_id))

Hmm, I don't think KVM should always override a smaller ID.  It should be a moot
point, since xapic_id_mismatch will be set if "xapic_id != (u8)vcpu->vcpu_id",
i.e. if the incoming vCPU has a smaller vCPU ID and a true xAPIC ID collision
(not due to truncation).  But to match kvm_apic_match_physical_addr(), I think
it would be this?

		if (!apic_x2apic_mode(apic) &&
		    (!new->phys_map[xapic_id] ||
		     (u8)new->phys_map[xapic_id]->vcpu->vcpu_id == vcpu->vcpu_id))

>  			new->phys_map[xapic_id] = apic;
>  	} else {
>  		/*
> -- 
> 2.43.7
> 
>