From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
Cc: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
maz@kernel.org, oliver.upton@linux.dev, james.clark@linaro.org,
will@kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
yuzenghui@huawei.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
broonie@kernel.org, kristina.martsenko@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/14] KVM: arm64: Consolidate allowed and restricted VM feature checks
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 16:12:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z1MihH-aLq6lTccm@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241202154742.3611749-2-tabba@google.com>
On Monday 02 Dec 2024 at 15:47:28 (+0000), Fuad Tabba wrote:
> The definitions for features allowed and allowed with
> restrictions for protected guests, which are based on feature
> registers, were defined and checked for separately, even though
> they are handled in the same way. This could result in missing
> checks for certain features, e.g., pointer authentication,
> causing traps for allowed features.
>
> Consolidate the definitions into one. Use that new definition to
> construct the guest view of the feature registers for
> consistency.
>
> Fixes: 6c30bfb18d0b ("KVM: arm64: Add handlers for protected VM System Registers")
> Reported-by: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
>
> ---
>
> Note: This patch ends up being a no-op, since none of the changes
> in it survive the series. It's included because it makes the rest
> of the series flow more smoothly.
Is the Fixes: tag above really needed then? It 'risks' being flagged as
a -stable candidate, but should it be?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-06 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-02 15:47 [PATCH v4 00/14] KVM: arm64: Rework guest VM fixed feature handling and trapping in pKVM Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 01/14] KVM: arm64: Consolidate allowed and restricted VM feature checks Fuad Tabba
2024-12-06 16:12 ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2024-12-09 8:03 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 02/14] KVM: arm64: Group setting traps for protected VMs by control register Fuad Tabba
2024-12-06 16:44 ` Quentin Perret
2024-12-09 8:06 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 03/14] KVM: arm64: Move checking protected vcpu features to a separate function Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 04/14] KVM: arm64: Use KVM extension checks for allowed protected VM capabilities Fuad Tabba
2024-12-06 17:10 ` Quentin Perret
2024-12-09 8:14 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-11 13:29 ` Quentin Perret
2024-12-11 13:30 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 05/14] KVM: arm64: Initialize feature id registers for protected VMs Fuad Tabba
2024-12-06 1:02 ` Oliver Upton
2024-12-06 10:04 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-06 17:13 ` Quentin Perret
2024-12-09 8:09 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 06/14] KVM: arm64: Set protected VM traps based on its view of feature registers Fuad Tabba
2024-12-06 17:31 ` Quentin Perret
2024-12-06 17:43 ` Mark Brown
2024-12-06 18:22 ` Marc Zyngier
2024-12-09 8:11 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 07/14] KVM: arm64: Rework specifying restricted features for protected VMs Fuad Tabba
2024-12-11 12:34 ` Quentin Perret
2024-12-11 13:11 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 08/14] KVM: arm64: Remove fixed_config.h header Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 09/14] KVM: arm64: Remove redundant setting of HCR_EL2 trap bit Fuad Tabba
2024-12-11 12:38 ` Quentin Perret
2024-12-11 12:52 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 10/14] KVM: arm64: Calculate cptr_el2 traps on activating traps Fuad Tabba
2024-12-11 12:46 ` Quentin Perret
2024-12-11 12:55 ` Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 11/14] KVM: arm64: Refactor kvm_reset_cptr_el2() Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 12/14] KVM: arm64: Fix the value of the CPTR_EL2 RES1 bitmask for nVHE Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 13/14] KVM: arm64: Remove PtrAuth guest vcpu flag Fuad Tabba
2024-12-02 15:47 ` [PATCH v4 14/14] KVM: arm64: Convert the SVE guest vcpu flag to a vm flag Fuad Tabba
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=Z1MihH-aLq6lTccm@google.com \
--to=qperret@google.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kristina.martsenko@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tabba@google.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).