From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (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 CC86533F7 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2023 14:58:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1682089097; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=7LC096k61C4co5uiqlVvGHf+K8GD+8vxgAbqEN6QsgQ=; b=cFgggTHnbYBNEqPX3qFGTXQOFtX/2cp/L/6vI9tm3IQ9aQUDMVO+G3vA+1sDSARglHa9zH yU4IuBa5y5s7VVAD+rma4j3q8LiT5ag9CnMZ6tiyZONSDaeL4KhQF4XvdD4KUcjmksVO0N 9e9KLxN0I5kpDdGokNAtzbMD9x5RhY8= Received: from mail-qt1-f197.google.com (mail-qt1-f197.google.com [209.85.160.197]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-255--rk37soOOQSYsXdSjb-1Sg-1; Fri, 21 Apr 2023 10:58:08 -0400 X-MC-Unique: -rk37soOOQSYsXdSjb-1Sg-1 Received: by mail-qt1-f197.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-3ef4f29c9d1so4863081cf.0 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:58:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682089087; x=1684681087; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7LC096k61C4co5uiqlVvGHf+K8GD+8vxgAbqEN6QsgQ=; b=jCNEEaYjKV5vjRlJmpjrhQTXlj8Old6mba9p/OFGVXgDnYRNuswnMCvrLKiAdh3Wr8 yGjtHAziu9YbQRP7p26Y8luI0ymlrvWIxz8wNjtqu+pk1WUCiJ1XoxxZuDv69FssYx3+ KwruSj+cpBa6vhVqnnRpM27yXku96mSPcHqevS0sfNWpreuAiSkg6Q6DmLfwSD6akYQ7 gjcNzHRNnJZI+KV/UseHraAvWi7a71zSUPMi0KMw4LKinriOQVUVD/k7UI95cAGlnvoR Rsjeo/ZPeQQ846F8hbZzLRGoHi1dn9HNla2U+DkvXwgq0BmAjrdagqiv/m71oNumTcui AkTw== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9c9Svkd5PjcfkpluNPbRqg7ldLHmVLkOJRn6iKl1xt8UjuWRGn6 U9Oukj+3duIU1Kui0WbMnMqbT08tCjE2MnVctCleHsPlonW6UchpXkcSMo8vO9Z+Pu3/Wq7Eobz CaKg4/JvLySKaKb6T X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7d06:0:b0:3ee:5637:29be with SMTP id g6-20020ac87d06000000b003ee563729bemr10128344qtb.5.1682089087583; Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:58:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350Z+IcubMRrk1IJq5k7fg+CwcAga6nlSsWwbEUJWDqsGTpE2BqXmuDYKV5JvxqtA2eOIr2WmoA== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7d06:0:b0:3ee:5637:29be with SMTP id g6-20020ac87d06000000b003ee563729bemr10128329qtb.5.1682089087331; Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:58:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x1n (bras-base-aurron9127w-grc-40-70-52-229-124.dsl.bell.ca. [70.52.229.124]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y7-20020ae9f407000000b0074e0e6aae1csm1385221qkl.36.2023.04.21.07.58.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:58:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 10:58:05 -0400 From: Peter Xu To: Anish Moorthy Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, maz@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, seanjc@google.com, jthoughton@google.com, bgardon@google.com, dmatlack@google.com, ricarkol@google.com, axelrasmussen@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/22] KVM: Annotate -EFAULTs from kvm_vcpu_map() Message-ID: References: <20230412213510.1220557-1-amoorthy@google.com> <20230412213510.1220557-10-amoorthy@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 04:34:39PM -0700, Anish Moorthy wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 1:53 PM Peter Xu wrote: > > > > Totally not familiar with nested, just a pure question on whether all the > > kvm_vcpu_map() callers will be prepared to receive this -EFAULT yet? > > The return values of this function aren't being changed: I'm just > setting some extra state in the kvm_run_struct in the case where this > function already returns -EFAULT. Ah, I was wrongly assuming there'll be more -EFAULTs after you enable the new memslot flag KVM_MEM_ABSENT_MAPPING_FAULT. But then when I re-read your patch below I see that the new flag only affects __kvm_faultin_pfn(). Then I assume that's fine, thanks. -- Peter Xu