From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/kvm: Disable KVM_ASYNC_PF_SEND_ALWAYS
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2020 11:32:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200408093235.GB24663@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F2BD5266-A9E5-41C8-AC64-CC33EB401B37@amacapital.net>
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 09:48:02PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I’m fine with the flow being different. do_machine_check() could
> have entirely different logic to decide the error in PV.
Nope, do_machine_check() is already as ugly as it gets. I don't want any
more crap in it.
> But I think we should reuse the overall flow: kernel gets #MC with
> RIP pointing to the offending instruction. If there’s an extable
> entry that can handle memory failure, handle it. If it’s a user
> access, handle it. If it’s an unrecoverable error because it was a
> non-extable kernel access, oops or panic.
>
> The actual PV part could be extremely simple: the host just needs to
> tell the guest “this #MC is due to memory failure at this guest
> physical address”. No banks, no DIMM slot, no rendezvous crap
> (LMCE), no other nonsense. It would be nifty if the host also told the
> guest what the guest virtual address was if the host knows it.
It better be a whole different path and a whole different vector. If you
wanna keep it simple and apart from all of the other nonsense, then you
can just as well use a completely different vector.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-08 9:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-07 2:26 [PATCH v2] x86/kvm: Disable KVM_ASYNC_PF_SEND_ALWAYS Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-07 15:03 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-07 15:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-07 15:59 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-07 19:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-07 19:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-08 7:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-09 6:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-09 8:40 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-03-09 9:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-09 18:14 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-09 19:05 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-09 20:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-06 19:09 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-04-06 20:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-06 20:32 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-06 20:42 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-07 17:21 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-04-07 17:38 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-07 20:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-07 21:41 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-07 22:07 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-07 22:29 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-08 0:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-05-21 15:55 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-04-07 22:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-08 4:48 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-08 9:32 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2020-04-08 10:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-08 18:23 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-04-07 22:49 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-04-08 10:01 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-07 22:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-07 23:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-08 8:23 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-08 13:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-08 15:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-08 16:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-09 9:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-08 15:34 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-04-08 16:50 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-08 18:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-08 20:34 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-04-08 23:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-08 23:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-09 4:50 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-09 9:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-09 11:36 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-04-09 12:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-09 14:13 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-04-09 14:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-09 15:03 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-09 15:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-09 17:32 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-04-06 21:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=20200408093235.GB24663@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.