From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] KVM: arm64: Selftest for pKVM transitions
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 14:32:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <867c5crd2j.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250225015327.3708420-4-qperret@google.com>
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 01:53:26 +0000,
Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
>
> We have recently found a bug [1] in the pKVM memory ownership
> transitions by code inspection, but it could have been caught with a
> test.
>
> Introduce a boot-time selftest exercising all the known pKVM memory
> transitions and importantly checks the rejection of illegal transitions.
>
> The new test is hidden behind a new Kconfig option separate from
> CONFIG_EL2_NVHE_DEBUG on purpose as that has side effects on the
> transition checks ([1] doesn't reproduce with EL2 debug enabled).
That's a bit annoying, isn't it? Without EL2_DEBUG selected, you won't
get any stacktrace, and the WARN_ON()s are a guaranteed panic. Yes,
this is better than nothing, but I'm a bit worried this is going to be
hard to use.
Is there a way to reduce the impact the EL2 debug has on the rest of
the code? It feels like it is more invasive than it should be...
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-26 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-25 1:53 [PATCH v2 0/4] Selftest for pKVM ownership transitions Quentin Perret
2025-02-25 1:53 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] KVM: arm64: Add .hyp.data section Quentin Perret
2025-02-25 1:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] KVM: arm64: Don't WARN from __pkvm_host_share_guest() Quentin Perret
2025-02-25 18:02 ` Marc Zyngier
2025-02-25 19:49 ` Quentin Perret
2025-02-26 14:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2025-02-25 1:53 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] KVM: arm64: Selftest for pKVM transitions Quentin Perret
2025-02-26 14:32 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2025-02-26 18:10 ` Quentin Perret
2025-02-25 1:53 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] KVM: arm64: Extend pKVM selftest for np-guests Quentin Perret
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=867c5crd2j.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).