vmm/svm: post LAPIC interrupts using event injection, not virtual interrupts

The virtual interrupt method uses V_IRQ, V_INTR_PRIO, and V_INTR_VECTOR
fields of VMCB to inject a virtual interrupt into a guest VM. This
method has many advantages over the direct event injection as it
offloads all decisions of whether and when the interrupt can be
delivered to the guest. But with a purely software emulated vAPIC the
advantage is also a problem. The problem is that the hypervisor does
not have any precise control over when the interrupt is actually
delivered to the guest (or a notification about that). Because of that
the hypervisor cannot update the interrupt vector in IRR and ISR in the
same way as real hardware would. The hypervisor becomes aware that the
interrupt is being serviced only upon the first VMEXIT after the
interrupt is delivered. This creates a window between the actual
interrupt delivery and the update of IRR and ISR. That means that IRR
and ISR might not be correctly set up to the point of the
end-of-interrupt signal.

The described deviation has been observed to cause an interrupt loss in
the following scenario. vCPU0 posts an inter-processor interrupt to
vCPU1. The interrupt is injected as a virtual interrupt by the
hypervisor. The interrupt is delivered to a guest and an interrupt
handler is invoked. The handler performs a requested action and
acknowledges the request by modifying a global variable. So far, there
is no VMEXIT and the hypervisor is unaware of the events. Then, vCPU0
notices the acknowledgment and sends another IPI with the same vector.
The IPI gets collapsed into the previous IPI in the IRR of vCPU1. Only
after that a VMEXIT of vCPU1 occurs. At that time the vector is cleared
in the IRR and is set in the ISR. vCPU1 has vAPIC state as if the
second IPI has never been sent.
The scenario is impossible on the real hardware because IRR and ISR are
updated just before the interrupt handler gets started.

I saw several possibilities of fixing the problem. One is to intercept
the virtual interrupt delivery to update IRR and ISR at the right
moment. The other is to deliver the LAPIC interrupts using the event
injection, same as legacy interrupts. I opted to use the latter
approach for several reasons. It's equivalent to what VMM/Intel does
(in !VMX case). It appears to be what VirtualBox and KVM do. The code
is already there (to support legacy interrupts).

Another possibility was to use a special intermediate state for a vector
after it is injected using a virtual interrupt and before it is known
whether it was accepted or is still pending.
That approach was implemented in https://reviews.freebsd.org/D13828
That method is more complex and does not have any clear advantage.

Please see sections 15.20 and 15.21.4 of "AMD64 Architecture
Programmer's Manual Volume 2: System Programming" (publication 24593,
revision 3.29) for comparison between event injection and virtual
interrupt injection.

PR: 215972
Reported by: ajschot@hotmail.com, grehan
Tested by: anish, grehan, Nils Beyer <nbe@renzel.net>
Reviewed by: anish, grehan
MFC after: 2 weeks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D13780