From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793141577; b=kiJRRLcfA7JodaO9yZ1vIG8kQCCFgLau8e/PMO19IPXr9BUuvbxVms/jCntDuD9XRQSp o/NBvvy9yQ8p3rVln/NJKbw3Qx6NFRTjqwD4DplfuFpeO95llTSQ+sJtnAR1CbXn9zvd+ Z1BHgYy/IWBWJlcSiPBfbiysIAEgVJEJc0NEha98Q7grM+COXMmnNrwOadb0IKEkk32wq 8Gd3T/ZVmfKzPSTbij6NKBj8W8Djf/A3kVCuVbaanzrqhGm3fafmWHG2Rb8LIHzawNfH4 MxzQtPBH1A14fKGvISw8gUHWFgeUXyK4A5zFrCV5+zyroR/lJzY2iiXSRpyuPw7xhKg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793141577; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date; bh=LLHeszN3NBnCSekfmuYWBeUA8vPHYFxSGgvz8Lu2E70=; b=KFmf0MJjMTwtMqU1wyqVNou6KyvG5cMiEzq6MSyFbjkmO4de8BaiAxDRVS9ElOoIuXLD JKmEIMbqH/x3l+5XEJqcHSkpfpw8UIkAr3jYZqVmZzBH+KLpVUwRoWc5/vFnobHMXT/Xq qktLw88UjZvAzh/DLeyxG+0b+DCzo9VnD6D8XzEnY0H0hvFcwfN/Ebnw/SUCMopsRcCrs S/FxzOBJbBU2khnZwbUP25bw0L7bYClbULYRigHLi7kUoeLarDihXgMkk2lYwDc8gkYqX vNlOc/oI04Q4VVx5F8uW0p3b7ewpIn/VpJMmOWJp3QSlsyHlJqmVv7XiweJypm4r3iA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=XckmGcSO; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 388D6606A31A for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2026 22:52:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=XckmGcSO Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 94FA21F01825; Tue, 27 Oct 2026 22:52:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1793141576; bh=LLHeszN3NBnCSekfmuYWBeUA8vPHYFxSGgvz8Lu2E70=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=XckmGcSO7wlIx+r/CaC0SVZlIvtyhHsYmAhe5ET0NVsuPbnNdrI+I16qE4+oMt64x h+E8Dnw4np2YMChXTI12IkHB4pt9jJjzqx6/F2uuVnBxdfcZ3NiS4Io4NALtp+uazs mQhMDT4PgSSt9KKxnFl9+L/pnRfY6nMc0H10ta8lyu76Z8rK8QdGc4AzwAa/kAhX20 lBArsX01EhZY2u7YWi8eF4csojH2iwE4Byem2IV9aUNNpjtEToMIMBK1FWXqlXMzxx uG255G1R1Nc8N6UZteo6Yl4GTSwldSdxUmYGTHMACK439eT3HER9FU+004rP6HG5/L 5AYBbuQMqNpew== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] KVM: selftests: Expect failure when trying to set EFER that violates vCPU model Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Sean Christopherson" Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261027224914.1574319-7-seanjc@google.com> References: <20261027224914.1574319-1-seanjc@google.com> <20261027224914.1574319-7-seanjc@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2026 22:52:55 +0000 X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Medium] KVM: selftests: uninitialized sregs in test_sregs_lmsle() -- commit 6277431d999ca1b09f23758ba28993921a931827 Author: Sean Christopherson KVM: selftests: Expect failure when trying to set EFER that violates vCPU m= odel This commit updates test_host_initiated_lmsle() in svm_nested_efer_test.c to expect KVM_SET_MSRS to reject EFER.LMSLE=3D1 when EFER_LMSLE_MBZ is enabled= in guest CPUID, and cleans up related comments in the test. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/svm_nested_efer_test.c b/too= ls/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/svm_nested_efer_test.c > index fa9cfe8b12427..bdec7cdb37146 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/svm_nested_efer_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/svm_nested_efer_test.c [ ... ] > @@ -222,11 +219,6 @@ static void test_sregs_lmsle(void) > vm =3D vm_create_with_one_vcpu(&vcpu, NULL); > vcpu_set_cpuid_feature(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_EFER_LMSLE_MBZ); > =20 > - /* > - * Unlike KVM_SET_MSRS, KVM_SET_SREGS runs the full set of guest CPUID > - * checks, i.e. rejects EFER.LMSLE even though it's host-initiated. > - */ > - vcpu_sregs_get(vcpu, &sregs); > TEST_ASSERT(!(sregs.efer & EFER_LMSLE), "EFER.LMSLE unexpectedly set"); [Severity: Medium] Was removing vcpu_sregs_get(vcpu, &sregs) in test_sregs_lmsle() unintention= al? Without that call, the stack variable sregs is left uninitialized when TEST_ASSERT() reads sregs.efer and when sregs.efer |=3D EFER_LMSLE is passe= d to _vcpu_sregs_set(vcpu, &sregs): tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/svm_nested_efer_test.c:test_sregs_lmsle() { struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu; struct kvm_sregs sregs; struct kvm_vm *vm; int rc; vm =3D vm_create_with_one_vcpu(&vcpu, NULL); vcpu_set_cpuid_feature(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_EFER_LMSLE_MBZ); TEST_ASSERT(!(sregs.efer & EFER_LMSLE), "EFER.LMSLE unexpectedly set"); sregs.efer |=3D EFER_LMSLE; rc =3D _vcpu_sregs_set(vcpu, &sregs); ... } In addition to reading uninitialized stack memory on the assertion, passing an uninitialized struct kvm_sregs to KVM_SET_SREGS means KVM may reject the ioctl due to garbage in other fields rather than specifically testing rejection of EFER.LMSLE=3D1. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261027224914.1574= 319-1-seanjc@google.com?part=3D6