From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57085C433EF for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 12:02:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241188AbiARMCZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jan 2022 07:02:25 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:54970 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241149AbiARMCW (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jan 2022 07:02:22 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AEBED6E; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 04:02:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from C02TD0UTHF1T.local (unknown [10.57.37.52]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B301E3FA31; Tue, 18 Jan 2022 04:02:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 12:02:06 +0000 From: Mark Rutland To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Christian Borntraeger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com, anup.patel@wdc.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, atish.patra@wdc.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, bp@alien8.de, catalin.marinas@arm.com, chenhuacai@kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, david@redhat.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com, frederic@kernel.org, gor@linux.ibm.com, hca@linux.ibm.com, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, james.morse@arm.com, jmattson@google.com, joro@8bytes.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, maz@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, nsaenzju@redhat.com, palmer@dabbelt.com, paulmck@kernel.org, paulus@samba.org, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, seanjc@google.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, tsbogend@alpha.franken.de, vkuznets@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com, will@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] kvm: fix latent guest entry/exit bugs Message-ID: <20220118120154.GA17938@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> References: <20220111153539.2532246-1-mark.rutland@arm.com> <127a6117-85fb-7477-983c-daf09e91349d@linux.ibm.com> <8aa0cada-7f00-47b3-41e4-8a9e7beaae47@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8aa0cada-7f00-47b3-41e4-8a9e7beaae47@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 06:45:36PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 1/14/22 16:19, Mark Rutland wrote: > > I also think there is another issue here. When an IRQ is taken from SIE, will > > user_mode(regs) always be false, or could it be true if the guest userspace is > > running? If it can be true I think tha context tracking checks can complain, > > and it*might* be possible to trigger a panic(). > > I think that it would be false, because the guest PSW is in the SIE block > and switched on SIE entry and exit, but I might be incorrect. Ah; that's the crux of my confusion: I had thought the guest PSW would be placed in the regular lowcore *_old_psw slots. From looking at the entry asm it looks like the host PSW (around the invocation of SIE) is stored there, since that's what the OUTSIDE + SIEEXIT handling is checking for. Assuming that's correct, I agree this problem doesn't exist, and there's only the common RCU/tracing/lockdep management to fix. Sorry for the noise, and thanks for the pointer! Thanks, Mark.