From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EA7533970F for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 15:36:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764171410; cv=none; b=qnsBCTaoWfNi9T4X9enfYoD8ND/fulqx55D0jmMmj7ucUZnK2eJ+jotjWbhGKEhyREPQw+2+ex97mmbGHqtLo5jRTbgatXdhWYx5ImWID1g+do9OfwhMzlL8lfFDFydTw/za5XQ7kk41uammhRA2AzvsAmn2vrJdGlgZ3bdrGuM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764171410; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/8FCdi6x7TLlipr8hT2p3sBnfBjielKdgUHYCnvkaz8=; h=Date:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=QjyxVhS4pl4/KyJg833XuIi2XyyyfkTqip7cgWvEVzz6OeXu+F8eQsNZsMZAhJ1hZPhRfrfD8yNc0SDkNctn6NYnPyu7QsSZFkvw5inJRkGhMM0N2iV0odtcLWGZirIZXHqZ7X0hzq8w2WcNX1xQzgITxpsNWKEsA8TQe6WPFMY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=dMxyN/yd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="dMxyN/yd" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8B62AC4CEF7; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 15:36:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1764171409; bh=/8FCdi6x7TLlipr8hT2p3sBnfBjielKdgUHYCnvkaz8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=dMxyN/yd84PF0UFsoBD7f/uvgZOCAUi4bi2Fr5AsEBGL5JKS1GVDnm+gAiHYm0y8Y oAXMFqfLjI0cDIrtgj1GdWXqUdugXrr1PU8DbXSFC3iPbTXfwlSp2EQuswAdPA+tzK U7f/GWpqjquUkgotOswxehle/8uSfek68hlUMcm0uL2TSUicGQdDurVALA3xoHlW2u 0mU4otPW+NMBOZgHBA0BIoETN7jCiGC5tjYxUtRvSHr5dGX9B8+Kv1hnjpD1IaPbs2 3JhtF0cjRci3stnOp2FBoe5ls9eE0/Va0tDuKBCcf7SdiIcn140Hlnbu29884iQCCO ZqFwm41AxSM9Q== Received: from sofa.misterjones.org ([185.219.108.64] helo=goblin-girl.misterjones.org) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vOHZX-00000008WTd-19m0; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 15:36:47 +0000 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 15:36:46 +0000 Message-ID: <864iqgrek1.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Marc Zyngier To: Fuad Tabba Cc: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, will@kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, vladimir.murzin@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/9] KVM: arm64: Include VM type when checking VM capabilities in pKVM In-Reply-To: References: <20251118103807.707500-1-tabba@google.com> <20251118103807.707500-6-tabba@google.com> <867bvdqd4m.wl-maz@kernel.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/30.1 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 185.219.108.64 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: tabba@google.com, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, will@kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, vladimir.murzin@arm.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 11:00:47 +0000, Fuad Tabba wrote: > > Hi Marc, > > I agree, but I don't think this patch changes this behavior. Later on > in this series we expand the check to apply to non-protected VMs to > also restrict features that are not allowed in protected mode in > general -- something that until this series we didn't have. Ah, you are correct. Apologies for being so thick. Still, I think we need to do something here -- the whole extension check without context is just broken. Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.