Re: [PATCH v2] x86/xen: avoid warning in Xen pv guest with CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT enabled

["Jürgen Groß" <jgross@suse.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1418 bytes --]

On 27.01.21 12:23, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 27/01/2021 10:26, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>> On 27.01.21 10:43, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 27/01/2021 09:38, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
>>>> index 4409306364dc..ca5ac10fcbf7 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pv.c
>>>> @@ -583,6 +583,12 @@ DEFINE_IDTENTRY_RAW(xenpv_exc_debug)
>>>>            exc_debug(regs);
>>>>    }
>>>>    +DEFINE_IDTENTRY_RAW(exc_xen_unknown_trap)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    /* This should never happen and there is no way to handle it. */
>>>> +    panic("Unknown trap in Xen PV mode.");
>>>
>>> Looks much better.  How about including regs->entry_vector here, just to
>>> short circuit the inevitable swearing which will accompany encountering
>>> this panic() ?
>>
>> You are aware the regs parameter is struct pt_regs *, not the Xen
>> struct cpu_user_regs *?
> 
> Yes, but I was assuming that they both contained the same information.
> 
>>
>> So I have no idea how I should get this information without creating
>> a per-vector handler.
> 
> Oh - that's dull.
> 
> Fine then.  Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> 

I think I'll switch the panic() to printk(); BUG(); in order to have
more diagnostic data. Can I keep your R-b: with that modification?


Juergen

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3135 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]