* [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
@ 2026-07-20 0:12 Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2026-07-20 7:19 ` [4.22] " Jan Beulich
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki @ 2026-07-20 0:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
Cc: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki, Jan Beulich, Andrew Cooper,
Roger Pau Monné, Teddy Astie
Commit 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
converted memcpy() of the cpu_user_regs structure to explicit copy of
its fields. In the compat case, it intentionally missed few of them,
named in the commit message. But the 64bit case missed also r8-r15
registers, which was not intentional. This, at least, caused Linux
6.18.x crash when resuming PVH domU.
Fix it by adding missing assignments.
Fixes: 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
---
xen/arch/x86/domain.c | 8 ++++++++
xen/arch/x86/domctl.c | 8 ++++++++
2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
index 1d458f1372e5..ba7244ccc513 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
@@ -1255,6 +1255,14 @@ int arch_set_info_guest(
if ( !compat )
{
+ v->arch.user_regs.r15 = c.nat->user_regs.r15;
+ v->arch.user_regs.r14 = c.nat->user_regs.r14;
+ v->arch.user_regs.r13 = c.nat->user_regs.r13;
+ v->arch.user_regs.r12 = c.nat->user_regs.r12;
+ v->arch.user_regs.r11 = c.nat->user_regs.r11;
+ v->arch.user_regs.r10 = c.nat->user_regs.r10;
+ v->arch.user_regs.r9 = c.nat->user_regs.r9;
+ v->arch.user_regs.r8 = c.nat->user_regs.r8;
v->arch.user_regs.rbx = c.nat->user_regs.rbx;
v->arch.user_regs.rcx = c.nat->user_regs.rcx;
v->arch.user_regs.rdx = c.nat->user_regs.rdx;
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
index 07f712a0a40d..3ea4c650eee0 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
@@ -1481,6 +1481,14 @@ void arch_get_info_guest(struct vcpu *v, vcpu_guest_context_u c)
if ( !compat )
{
/* Backing memory is pre-zeroed. */
+ c.nat->user_regs.r15 = v->arch.user_regs.r15;
+ c.nat->user_regs.r14 = v->arch.user_regs.r14;
+ c.nat->user_regs.r13 = v->arch.user_regs.r13;
+ c.nat->user_regs.r12 = v->arch.user_regs.r12;
+ c.nat->user_regs.r11 = v->arch.user_regs.r11;
+ c.nat->user_regs.r10 = v->arch.user_regs.r10;
+ c.nat->user_regs.r9 = v->arch.user_regs.r9;
+ c.nat->user_regs.r8 = v->arch.user_regs.r8;
c.nat->user_regs.rbx = v->arch.user_regs.rbx;
c.nat->user_regs.rcx = v->arch.user_regs.rcx;
c.nat->user_regs.rdx = v->arch.user_regs.rdx;
--
2.54.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [4.22] Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 0:12 [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest() Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
@ 2026-07-20 7:19 ` Jan Beulich
2026-07-20 8:48 ` Oleksii Kurochko
2026-07-20 8:57 ` Andrew Cooper
2026-07-20 9:02 ` Teddy Astie
2026-07-20 9:57 ` Frediano Ziglio
2 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2026-07-20 7:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki, Oleksii Kurochko, Andrew Cooper
Cc: Roger Pau Monné, Teddy Astie, xen-devel
On 20.07.2026 02:12, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> Commit 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
> converted memcpy() of the cpu_user_regs structure to explicit copy of
> its fields. In the compat case, it intentionally missed few of them,
> named in the commit message. But the 64bit case missed also r8-r15
> registers, which was not intentional. This, at least, caused Linux
> 6.18.x crash when resuming PVH domU.
Oh, wow, what a bad mistake (including by me as the reviewer).
> Fix it by adding missing assignments.
>
> Fixes: 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
> Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
One remark though (equally applying to the original change):
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> @@ -1255,6 +1255,14 @@ int arch_set_info_guest(
>
> if ( !compat )
> {
> + v->arch.user_regs.r15 = c.nat->user_regs.r15;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r14 = c.nat->user_regs.r14;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r13 = c.nat->user_regs.r13;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r12 = c.nat->user_regs.r12;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r11 = c.nat->user_regs.r11;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r10 = c.nat->user_regs.r10;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r9 = c.nat->user_regs.r9;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r8 = c.nat->user_regs.r8;
> v->arch.user_regs.rbx = c.nat->user_regs.rbx;
> v->arch.user_regs.rcx = c.nat->user_regs.rcx;
> v->arch.user_regs.rdx = c.nat->user_regs.rdx;
Neither here nor ...
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> @@ -1481,6 +1481,14 @@ void arch_get_info_guest(struct vcpu *v, vcpu_guest_context_u c)
> if ( !compat )
> {
> /* Backing memory is pre-zeroed. */
> + c.nat->user_regs.r15 = v->arch.user_regs.r15;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r14 = v->arch.user_regs.r14;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r13 = v->arch.user_regs.r13;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r12 = v->arch.user_regs.r12;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r11 = v->arch.user_regs.r11;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r10 = v->arch.user_regs.r10;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r9 = v->arch.user_regs.r9;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r8 = v->arch.user_regs.r8;
> c.nat->user_regs.rbx = v->arch.user_regs.rbx;
> c.nat->user_regs.rcx = v->arch.user_regs.rcx;
> c.nat->user_regs.rdx = v->arch.user_regs.rdx;
... here it becomes clear what has determined the order in which fields
are copied. It's neither by register number nor by field order nor
alphabetically. We might do ourselves a (however minor) favor if we used
a clear criteria; likely field order would be best. The more that the
new internal struct cpu_user_regs mirrors field order from the original
external one. Andrew (in particular)?
Also, despite this being an issue in 4.21 already, I think this definitely
wants considering for 4.22.
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [4.22] Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 7:19 ` [4.22] " Jan Beulich
@ 2026-07-20 8:48 ` Oleksii Kurochko
2026-07-20 9:11 ` Jan Beulich
2026-07-20 8:57 ` Andrew Cooper
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Oleksii Kurochko @ 2026-07-20 8:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki, Andrew Cooper
Cc: Roger Pau Monné, Teddy Astie, xen-devel
On 7/20/26 9:19 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 20.07.2026 02:12, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
>> Commit 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
>> converted memcpy() of the cpu_user_regs structure to explicit copy of
>> its fields. In the compat case, it intentionally missed few of them,
>> named in the commit message. But the 64bit case missed also r8-r15
>> registers, which was not intentional. This, at least, caused Linux
>> 6.18.x crash when resuming PVH domU.
>
> Oh, wow, what a bad mistake (including by me as the reviewer).
>
>> Fix it by adding missing assignments.
>>
>> Fixes: 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
>> Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>
> One remark though (equally applying to the original change):
>
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
>> @@ -1255,6 +1255,14 @@ int arch_set_info_guest(
>>
>> if ( !compat )
>> {
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r15 = c.nat->user_regs.r15;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r14 = c.nat->user_regs.r14;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r13 = c.nat->user_regs.r13;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r12 = c.nat->user_regs.r12;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r11 = c.nat->user_regs.r11;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r10 = c.nat->user_regs.r10;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r9 = c.nat->user_regs.r9;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r8 = c.nat->user_regs.r8;
>> v->arch.user_regs.rbx = c.nat->user_regs.rbx;
>> v->arch.user_regs.rcx = c.nat->user_regs.rcx;
>> v->arch.user_regs.rdx = c.nat->user_regs.rdx;
>
> Neither here nor ...
>
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
>> @@ -1481,6 +1481,14 @@ void arch_get_info_guest(struct vcpu *v, vcpu_guest_context_u c)
>> if ( !compat )
>> {
>> /* Backing memory is pre-zeroed. */
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r15 = v->arch.user_regs.r15;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r14 = v->arch.user_regs.r14;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r13 = v->arch.user_regs.r13;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r12 = v->arch.user_regs.r12;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r11 = v->arch.user_regs.r11;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r10 = v->arch.user_regs.r10;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r9 = v->arch.user_regs.r9;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r8 = v->arch.user_regs.r8;
>> c.nat->user_regs.rbx = v->arch.user_regs.rbx;
>> c.nat->user_regs.rcx = v->arch.user_regs.rcx;
>> c.nat->user_regs.rdx = v->arch.user_regs.rdx;
>
> ... here it becomes clear what has determined the order in which fields
> are copied. It's neither by register number nor by field order nor
> alphabetically. We might do ourselves a (however minor) favor if we used
> a clear criteria; likely field order would be best. The more that the
> new internal struct cpu_user_regs mirrors field order from the original
> external one. Andrew (in particular)?
>
> Also, despite this being an issue in 4.21 already, I think this definitely
> wants considering for 4.22.
Considering that it leads to crash of Linux I agree that we want to have
this in 4.22:
Reviewed-by: Oleksii Kurochko <oleksii.kurochko@gmail.com>
Thanks.
~ Oleksii
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [4.22] Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 8:48 ` Oleksii Kurochko
@ 2026-07-20 9:11 ` Jan Beulich
2026-07-20 9:19 ` Oleksii Kurochko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2026-07-20 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Oleksii Kurochko
Cc: Roger Pau Monné, Teddy Astie, xen-devel,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki, Andrew Cooper
On 20.07.2026 10:48, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> Considering that it leads to crash of Linux I agree that we want to have
> this in 4.22:
> Reviewed-by: Oleksii Kurochko <oleksii.kurochko@gmail.com>
Btw, I'm transcribing this to Release-acked-by: while preparing to commit.
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [4.22] Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 9:11 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2026-07-20 9:19 ` Oleksii Kurochko
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Oleksii Kurochko @ 2026-07-20 9:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich
Cc: Roger Pau Monné, Teddy Astie, xen-devel,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki, Andrew Cooper
On 7/20/26 11:11 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 20.07.2026 10:48, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>> Considering that it leads to crash of Linux I agree that we want to have
>> this in 4.22:
>> Reviewed-by: Oleksii Kurochko <oleksii.kurochko@gmail.com>
>
> Btw, I'm transcribing this to Release-acked-by: while preparing to commit.
Thanks. I missed to add Release-acked-by:
~ Oleksii
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [4.22] Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 7:19 ` [4.22] " Jan Beulich
2026-07-20 8:48 ` Oleksii Kurochko
@ 2026-07-20 8:57 ` Andrew Cooper
2026-07-20 9:59 ` Frediano Ziglio
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2026-07-20 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki, Oleksii Kurochko
Cc: Andrew Cooper, Roger Pau Monné, Teddy Astie, xen-devel
On 20/07/2026 8:19 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 20.07.2026 02:12, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
>> Commit 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
>> converted memcpy() of the cpu_user_regs structure to explicit copy of
>> its fields. In the compat case, it intentionally missed few of them,
>> named in the commit message. But the 64bit case missed also r8-r15
>> registers, which was not intentional. This, at least, caused Linux
>> 6.18.x crash when resuming PVH domU.
> Oh, wow, what a bad mistake (including by me as the reviewer).
Yes, I'm very embarrassed by this mistake. It also highlights a serious
gap in testing which we need to address. We've managed a release and a
half with PV migration plain broken before figuring out why.
>
>> Fix it by adding missing assignments.
>>
>> Fixes: 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
>> Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
>
> One remark though (equally applying to the original change):
>
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
>> @@ -1255,6 +1255,14 @@ int arch_set_info_guest(
>>
>> if ( !compat )
>> {
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r15 = c.nat->user_regs.r15;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r14 = c.nat->user_regs.r14;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r13 = c.nat->user_regs.r13;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r12 = c.nat->user_regs.r12;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r11 = c.nat->user_regs.r11;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r10 = c.nat->user_regs.r10;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r9 = c.nat->user_regs.r9;
>> + v->arch.user_regs.r8 = c.nat->user_regs.r8;
>> v->arch.user_regs.rbx = c.nat->user_regs.rbx;
>> v->arch.user_regs.rcx = c.nat->user_regs.rcx;
>> v->arch.user_regs.rdx = c.nat->user_regs.rdx;
> Neither here nor ...
>
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
>> @@ -1481,6 +1481,14 @@ void arch_get_info_guest(struct vcpu *v, vcpu_guest_context_u c)
>> if ( !compat )
>> {
>> /* Backing memory is pre-zeroed. */
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r15 = v->arch.user_regs.r15;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r14 = v->arch.user_regs.r14;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r13 = v->arch.user_regs.r13;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r12 = v->arch.user_regs.r12;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r11 = v->arch.user_regs.r11;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r10 = v->arch.user_regs.r10;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r9 = v->arch.user_regs.r9;
>> + c.nat->user_regs.r8 = v->arch.user_regs.r8;
>> c.nat->user_regs.rbx = v->arch.user_regs.rbx;
>> c.nat->user_regs.rcx = v->arch.user_regs.rcx;
>> c.nat->user_regs.rdx = v->arch.user_regs.rdx;
> ... here it becomes clear what has determined the order in which fields
> are copied. It's neither by register number nor by field order nor
> alphabetically. We might do ourselves a (however minor) favor if we used
> a clear criteria; likely field order would be best. The more that the
> new internal struct cpu_user_regs mirrors field order from the original
> external one. Andrew (in particular)?
They are the order that XLAT_cpu_user_regs() expanded in; that is -
x86_32's cpu_user_regs field order.
... which now I think about it is correct for one of the two uses of
XLAT_cpu_user_regs() but suboptimal for the other.
They all want to be field-order of the loading side, because that way
we're working with the prefetcher rather than against it.
I'm making a follow-up, because I think it's more complicated than just
interleaving these lines, and I suggest we take Marek's patch as-is.
~Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [4.22] Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 8:57 ` Andrew Cooper
@ 2026-07-20 9:59 ` Frediano Ziglio
2026-07-20 10:26 ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Frediano Ziglio @ 2026-07-20 9:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper
Cc: Jan Beulich, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki, Oleksii Kurochko,
Roger Pau Monné, Teddy Astie, xen-devel
On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 at 10:09, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> On 20/07/2026 8:19 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 20.07.2026 02:12, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> >> Commit 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
> >> converted memcpy() of the cpu_user_regs structure to explicit copy of
> >> its fields. In the compat case, it intentionally missed few of them,
> >> named in the commit message. But the 64bit case missed also r8-r15
> >> registers, which was not intentional. This, at least, caused Linux
> >> 6.18.x crash when resuming PVH domU.
> > Oh, wow, what a bad mistake (including by me as the reviewer).
>
> Yes, I'm very embarrassed by this mistake. It also highlights a serious
> gap in testing which we need to address. We've managed a release and a
> half with PV migration plain broken before figuring out why.
>
...
Is migration tested by CI or just for some reason this was not captured?
Frediano
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [4.22] Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 9:59 ` Frediano Ziglio
@ 2026-07-20 10:26 ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki @ 2026-07-20 10:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Frediano Ziglio
Cc: Andrew Cooper, Jan Beulich, Oleksii Kurochko,
Roger Pau Monné, Teddy Astie, xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1473 bytes --]
On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 10:59:00AM +0100, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 at 10:09, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 20/07/2026 8:19 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > On 20.07.2026 02:12, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> > >> Commit 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
> > >> converted memcpy() of the cpu_user_regs structure to explicit copy of
> > >> its fields. In the compat case, it intentionally missed few of them,
> > >> named in the commit message. But the 64bit case missed also r8-r15
> > >> registers, which was not intentional. This, at least, caused Linux
> > >> 6.18.x crash when resuming PVH domU.
> > > Oh, wow, what a bad mistake (including by me as the reviewer).
> >
> > Yes, I'm very embarrassed by this mistake. It also highlights a serious
> > gap in testing which we need to address. We've managed a release and a
> > half with PV migration plain broken before figuring out why.
> >
> ...
>
> Is migration tested by CI or just for some reason this was not captured?
It was in osstest, but it isn't in gitlab. I'll cleanup my current test
and submit it, but I'd really appreciate committing the (reviewed/acked)
test-artifacts series[1], as some of the pending tests depend on it
(although the suspend one doesn't).
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/ah24pfWb_orPRaJG@mail-itl/
--
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 0:12 [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest() Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2026-07-20 7:19 ` [4.22] " Jan Beulich
@ 2026-07-20 9:02 ` Teddy Astie
2026-07-20 9:57 ` Frediano Ziglio
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Teddy Astie @ 2026-07-20 9:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki, xen-devel
Cc: Jan Beulich, Andrew Cooper, Roger Pau Monné
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 714 bytes --]
Le 20/07/2026 à 02:16, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki a écrit :
> Commit 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
> converted memcpy() of the cpu_user_regs structure to explicit copy of
> its fields. In the compat case, it intentionally missed few of them,
> named in the commit message. But the 64bit case missed also r8-r15
> registers, which was not intentional. This, at least, caused Linux
> 6.18.x crash when resuming PVH domU.
>
> Fix it by adding missing assignments.
>
> Fixes: 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
> Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
Reviewed-by: Teddy Astie <teddy.astie@vates.tech>
[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 2489 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 665 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest()
2026-07-20 0:12 [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest() Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2026-07-20 7:19 ` [4.22] " Jan Beulich
2026-07-20 9:02 ` Teddy Astie
@ 2026-07-20 9:57 ` Frediano Ziglio
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Frediano Ziglio @ 2026-07-20 9:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Cc: xen-devel, Jan Beulich, Andrew Cooper, Roger Pau Monné,
Teddy Astie
On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 at 01:13, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
<marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com> wrote:
>
> Commit 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
> converted memcpy() of the cpu_user_regs structure to explicit copy of
> its fields. In the compat case, it intentionally missed few of them,
> named in the commit message. But the 64bit case missed also r8-r15
> registers, which was not intentional. This, at least, caused Linux
> 6.18.x crash when resuming PVH domU.
>
> Fix it by adding missing assignments.
>
> Fixes: 9f892f84c279 ("x86/domctl: Stop using XLAT_cpu_user_regs()")
> Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
> ---
> xen/arch/x86/domain.c | 8 ++++++++
> xen/arch/x86/domctl.c | 8 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> index 1d458f1372e5..ba7244ccc513 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> @@ -1255,6 +1255,14 @@ int arch_set_info_guest(
>
> if ( !compat )
> {
> + v->arch.user_regs.r15 = c.nat->user_regs.r15;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r14 = c.nat->user_regs.r14;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r13 = c.nat->user_regs.r13;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r12 = c.nat->user_regs.r12;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r11 = c.nat->user_regs.r11;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r10 = c.nat->user_regs.r10;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r9 = c.nat->user_regs.r9;
> + v->arch.user_regs.r8 = c.nat->user_regs.r8;
> v->arch.user_regs.rbx = c.nat->user_regs.rbx;
> v->arch.user_regs.rcx = c.nat->user_regs.rcx;
> v->arch.user_regs.rdx = c.nat->user_regs.rdx;
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> index 07f712a0a40d..3ea4c650eee0 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> @@ -1481,6 +1481,14 @@ void arch_get_info_guest(struct vcpu *v, vcpu_guest_context_u c)
> if ( !compat )
> {
> /* Backing memory is pre-zeroed. */
> + c.nat->user_regs.r15 = v->arch.user_regs.r15;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r14 = v->arch.user_regs.r14;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r13 = v->arch.user_regs.r13;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r12 = v->arch.user_regs.r12;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r11 = v->arch.user_regs.r11;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r10 = v->arch.user_regs.r10;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r9 = v->arch.user_regs.r9;
> + c.nat->user_regs.r8 = v->arch.user_regs.r8;
> c.nat->user_regs.rbx = v->arch.user_regs.rbx;
> c.nat->user_regs.rcx = v->arch.user_regs.rcx;
> c.nat->user_regs.rdx = v->arch.user_regs.rdx;
Reviewed-by: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@citrix.com>
Frediano
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-07-20 10:27 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-07-20 0:12 [PATCH] x86/domctl: restore all registers in arch_{get,set}_info_guest() Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2026-07-20 7:19 ` [4.22] " Jan Beulich
2026-07-20 8:48 ` Oleksii Kurochko
2026-07-20 9:11 ` Jan Beulich
2026-07-20 9:19 ` Oleksii Kurochko
2026-07-20 8:57 ` Andrew Cooper
2026-07-20 9:59 ` Frediano Ziglio
2026-07-20 10:26 ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2026-07-20 9:02 ` Teddy Astie
2026-07-20 9:57 ` Frediano Ziglio
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.