From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM, Fix QEMU-KVM is killed by guest SRAO MCE Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 12:47:53 +0300 Message-ID: <4BD80449.4010700@redhat.com> References: <1272351860.24125.15.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <4BD69680.10402@redhat.com> <1272360341.24125.116.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <4BD6AEC7.5020609@redhat.com> <1272423375.24125.189.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , "masbock@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" To: Huang Ying Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1272423375.24125.189.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 04/28/2010 05:56 AM, Huang Ying wrote: > >>> >>> Just want to use the side effect of copy_from_user, SIGBUS will be sent >>> to current process because the page touched is marked as poisoned. That >>> is, failure is expected, so the return value is not checked. >>> >>> >> What if the failure doesn't happen? Say, someone mmap()ed over the page. >> > Sorry, not get your idea clearly. hva is re-mmap()ed? We just read the > hva, not write, so I think it should be OK here. > > We don't generate a signal in this case. Does the code continue to work correctly (not sure what correctly is in this case... should probably just continue). There's also the possibility of -EFAULT. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function