From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] KVM: arm64: Selftest for pKVM transitions
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 14:32:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <867c5crd2j.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250225015327.3708420-4-qperret@google.com>
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 01:53:26 +0000,
Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
>
> We have recently found a bug [1] in the pKVM memory ownership
> transitions by code inspection, but it could have been caught with a
> test.
>
> Introduce a boot-time selftest exercising all the known pKVM memory
> transitions and importantly checks the rejection of illegal transitions.
>
> The new test is hidden behind a new Kconfig option separate from
> CONFIG_EL2_NVHE_DEBUG on purpose as that has side effects on the
> transition checks ([1] doesn't reproduce with EL2 debug enabled).
That's a bit annoying, isn't it? Without EL2_DEBUG selected, you won't
get any stacktrace, and the WARN_ON()s are a guaranteed panic. Yes,
this is better than nothing, but I'm a bit worried this is going to be
hard to use.
Is there a way to reduce the impact the EL2 debug has on the rest of
the code? It feels like it is more invasive than it should be...
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-26 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-25 1:53 [PATCH v2 0/4] Selftest for pKVM ownership transitions Quentin Perret
2025-02-25 1:53 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] KVM: arm64: Add .hyp.data section Quentin Perret
2025-02-25 1:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] KVM: arm64: Don't WARN from __pkvm_host_share_guest() Quentin Perret
2025-02-25 18:02 ` Marc Zyngier
2025-02-25 19:49 ` Quentin Perret
2025-02-26 14:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2025-02-25 1:53 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] KVM: arm64: Selftest for pKVM transitions Quentin Perret
2025-02-26 14:32 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2025-02-26 18:10 ` Quentin Perret
2025-02-25 1:53 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] KVM: arm64: Extend pKVM selftest for np-guests Quentin Perret
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=867c5crd2j.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.