From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-177.mta0.migadu.com (out-177.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C69659B6C for ; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 23:32:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.177 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710545534; cv=none; b=ijEwvL8Z/MWcp+8mtctHEFUrbdWZqtU1sbAQ7hBh6jRa/zSUMmVgGzsAmwmXfKvJb+y22D1roJeqK1xiaCXuFYnXP4eOyA8tfC7QIaTP8kpc3ebXLT1IWG07ZIjNK2TwR5vTSP0tv0/1vb1CIMSVWeGuVxhqRzD3KiZ1Ry3i+dU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710545534; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Iv1CbtxFlgKq1E50wTsvmZDkFRuYa2Hq3fbOGa1nk7I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Bjp7MI8BRJes1pvuMEGxU/YZofTpFJ6wZx5ImalwmNmmAikrNO/Jw3Po+gp/RnXwi4khM+rQt1b0yrFgRddcLMUrLJKrvGs+ZsEroW3PaKpZjBA5dnqosOPPuBUUb650UB62SlwdJ4Cj1Nl1OtWBy21D0BI1hN3ZPJoTi9lLiT4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=GaIkj8m+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.177 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="GaIkj8m+" Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 16:32:04 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1710545530; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=I0WUwJc4LZJbBgA3QDezWvPKLvCLtaq61JXaRKTdvGs=; b=GaIkj8m+SLy7EnRZ1J9S8H6rL4Po81drGuqcJxes0JnnEsWCL8TsOOcFdlDGbRthf1VngX FDQpXoyfg4b5HbLWJCz+I1daH8XUTj+mrv1lodOjhVu3Rq7bS1WCTXaGbzGBfe6V284hRM Ag5p/VT+IZ2Kywkz9y2CXJxSKvSJXbg= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Oliver Upton To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Mark Rutland , Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] KVM changes for Linux 6.9 merge window Message-ID: References: <20240315174939.2530483-1-pbonzini@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 03:28:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > The immediate cause of the failure is commit b80b701d5a67 ("KVM: > arm64: Snapshot all non-zero RES0/RES1 sysreg fields for later > checking") but I hope it worked at *some* point. I can't see how. Looks like commit fdd867fe9b32 ("arm64/sysreg: Add register fields for ID_AA64DFR1_EL1") changed the register definition that tripped the BUILD_BUG_ON(). But it'd be *wildly* unfair to blame that, the KVM assertions are added out of fear of new register definitions breaking our sysreg emulation. > I would guess / assume that commit cfc680bb04c5 ("arm64: sysreg: Add > layout for ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1") is also involved, but having recoiled in > horror from the awk script, I really can't even begin to guess at what > is going on. > > Bringing in other people who hopefully can sort this out. At this point I'm heavily biased towards just dropping the KVM checks for now than attempt a fix-forward. We can work things out better with arm64 folks next release. So unless anyone screams, I say we revert: 99101dda29e3 ("KVM: arm64: Make build-time check of RES0/RES1 bits optional") 891766581dea ("KVM: arm64: Add debugfs file for guest's ID registers") and do so atomically to avoid any further breakage of bisection. -- Thanks, Oliver