From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pj1-f73.google.com (mail-pj1-f73.google.com [209.85.216.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 533E025E479 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 19:04:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.73 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750446262; cv=none; b=CcMu9mzy4x4TT5aHLa3jYpNQw1XlCNFrEy53V5BHiabXMrgnl/+7kvnyyc3wyzsBznl03QNWaBX9mcVv+RT5Cy9hFyQXZQg+AN+wmByOYXNVV6KEVpD5+bl5zpN9piHkROmSYVrHGmNRuI8IhArFCYAbwedqtnC3ZMCjiyo5inc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750446262; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OLvgJGuXcx3y3Cr8WfBTX53IpLfHL0hGq+vYXbhOGw8=; h=Date:In-Reply-To:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=tOTbHLj5i+4mDjpmhCwDBKQ3C8+fXaq0Crex9cM1f29OIARHhW7/IkdtNhGB+2UjyVmoyglJ0BxP/ofs1avBtkzhfWuMt9ugSC2+Qt1cmqdAssV2PvoZGAcn+L4OismRC85i1l77uaSwp5U7W3ANjaGB0Z1sz+aMqQD2FKpISQg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--seanjc.bounces.google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=m8kUIooV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.73 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--seanjc.bounces.google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="m8kUIooV" Received: by mail-pj1-f73.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-313ff01d2a6so2016265a91.3 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 12:04:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1750446261; x=1751051061; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=5V4eEdTfLNGKvwTMu6gpmcWM1DlkOACRK3Iq7ll+QeI=; b=m8kUIooVLq3++5FCgfPznZUN6ny5CUWVt9OkwDIDQ52090gpMP0upvUgFAwxj5SL23 eJuSGExkDajaLhrdfTolIpLEpp/TXG4xK8O90vwzPbYwUK7uYbLA555u7z2AwcVYFog+ 8KM7vQtDLF7q5d+hppHWUlhnf2vEQvuonk37qfohXkK1jVXQc7GSEHxDILBn23ilq2No 8zwToWgu882qfbWdY2tOxvf/kWf/+sqAr3oYu3n6gCHKHAJizjAPwsAAh2DabKK7x2D+ ejBfKr8m4JCEXct9HWznIEAb0LBjS3hAP+oYVlfuDNJ35wglDMUfcihr+AnyALnC+kTw C9mw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1750446261; x=1751051061; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=5V4eEdTfLNGKvwTMu6gpmcWM1DlkOACRK3Iq7ll+QeI=; b=NasqbMIHzYPH/ZvC67jqX3vNuxY7Gs48Z/aUJi9An/k10Fvc1Gw3xXNY7CHgua4tPu 1zAGK15QlhYC0M70aReqtNdg4qQcftvshPFU0y8L5c7SYHoxh+YFJewGQTZme8R54yL4 5NLIFpp7TAXVxlAyjmv4On+Zcki2ZWFXiDfCStzgVqlhZrZ6oEVPZ+tFJ2maRjpySBUD AhgQzDwUW44qYzeED7PoxXHljWST0xvXgwUqkAOwhyc9QW0SBY4f+Y4eAlQhgkRljliU mkIjbxl+7+WjtuhwQDcgOEDk3nsxqCjqmPBTtGRUFgBkvnE2tdQ5QpiQ8yb5r9aHbp/o 6l/w== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVyQJbGjuRBbN8QxhoDhkZEKFfwKuX3W6IYknmzvptED/j0eDeqaohAEdA1ADyi6Px5iq7TLg==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzQm/rWYwCfenfMB7/xC5um9NjBWunN2lWAX6rEgK5j8Y1hsU0V NygCAWx3zODcpptPunzXHR3peivNDOfmbiSsgtHDa/lSdIYFIfSjfcX6mQNrw6mHKmFlXMftDbb E6EOwRw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF1HEaBNlmc+Q9tLzc6oMTF1bn1vxvg37edQgx2B9G2cFY6EZBuAhcrhbwMKilEdjhrXVyorY3eseo= X-Received: from pjbsr13.prod.google.com ([2002:a17:90b:4e8d:b0:311:8076:14f1]) (user=seanjc job=prod-delivery.src-stubby-dispatcher) by 2002:a17:90b:5143:b0:311:fde5:c4c2 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-3159d6361damr6100280a91.1.1750446260678; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 12:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 12:04:19 -0700 In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iommu@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20250611224604.313496-2-seanjc@google.com> <20250611224604.313496-4-seanjc@google.com> <86tt4lcgs3.wl-maz@kernel.org> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/62] KVM: arm64: WARN if unmapping vLPI fails From: Sean Christopherson To: Oliver Upton Cc: Marc Zyngier , Paolo Bonzini , Joerg Roedel , David Woodhouse , Lu Baolu , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sairaj Kodilkar , Vasant Hegde , Maxim Levitsky , Joao Martins , Francesco Lavra , David Matlack Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Fri, Jun 20, 2025, Oliver Upton wrote: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 10:22:32AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2025, Oliver Upton wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 07:34:35AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2025, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > > But not having an VLPI mapping for an interrupt at the point where we're > > > > > tearing down the forwarding is pretty benign. IRQs *still* go where they > > > > > should, and we don't lose anything. > > > > > > The VM may not actually be getting torn down, though. The series of > > > fixes [*] we took for 6.16 addressed games that VMMs might be playing on > > > irqbypass for a live VM. > > > > > > [*] https://lore.kernel.org/kvmarm/20250523194722.4066715-1-oliver.upton@linux.dev/ > > > > > > > All of those failure scenario seem like warnable offences when KVM thinks it has > > > > configured the IRQ to be forwarded to a vCPU. > > > > > > I tend to agree here, especially considering how horribly fragile GICv4 > > > has been in some systems. I know of a couple implementations where ITS > > > command failures and/or unmapped MSIs are fatal for the entire machine. > > > Debugging them has been a genuine pain in the ass. > > > > > > WARN'ing when state tracking for vLPIs is out of whack would've made it > > > a little easier. > > > > Marc, does this look and read better? > > > > I'd really, really like to get this sorted out asap, as it's the only thing > > blocking the series, and I want to get the series into linux-next early next > > week, before I go OOO for ~10 days. > > Can you just send it out as a standalone patch? It's only tangientally > related to the truckload of x86 stuff The issue is that "KVM: Don't WARN if updating IRQ bypass route fails" directly depends on both this patch and decent chunk of the x86 crud. I could probably trim some of the x86 crud by reshuffling patches around, but I can't get rid of it entirely. > that I'd rather not pull in the event of conflict resolution. LOL, why not? :-) If I post it as a standalone patch, could you/Marc put it into a stable topic branch based on kvm/master? (kvm/master now has patch 1, yay!) Then I can create a topic branch for this mountain of stuff based on the arm64 topic branch.