From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] KVM, pkeys: add pkeys support for permission_fault
 logic
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 10:35:30 +0100
Message-ID: <5641BA62.8050006@redhat.com>
References: <1447070055-4207-1-git-send-email-huaitong.han@intel.com>
 <1447070055-4207-7-git-send-email-huaitong.han@intel.com>
 <564094D6.9060805@redhat.com> <56409CDF.3020406@redhat.com>
 <1447147692.30613.12.camel@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "gleb@kernel.org" <gleb@kernel.org>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: "Han, Huaitong" <huaitong.han@intel.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55077 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751622AbbKJJfi (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 10 Nov 2015 04:35:38 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1447147692.30613.12.camel@intel.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>



On 10/11/2015 10:28, Han, Huaitong wrote:
> > 	pkru = is_long_mode(vcpu) ? read_pkru() : 0;
> > 	if (unlikely(pkru) && (pfec & PFERR_PK_MASK)) {
> > 		... from above ... */
> > 
> > 		/* Flip PFERR_PK_MASK if pkru_bits is non-zero */
> > 		pfec ^= -pkru_bits & PFERR_PK_MASK;
> 
> If pkru_bits is zero, it means dynamically conditions is not met for
> protection-key violations, so pfec on PK bit should be flipped. So I
> guess it should be:
> 	pfec ^= pkru_bits ? 0 : PFERR_PK_MASK;

Right.

Paolo