From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Huacai Chen <chenhc@lemote.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] KVM: x86: Use KVM_BUG/KVM_BUG_ON to handle bugs that are fatal to the VM
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:15:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c195f6b4-c714-16e3-879f-0196540e1987@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200929035257.GH31514@linux.intel.com>
On 29/09/20 05:52, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> I think usage should be limited to dangerous cases, basically WARN_ON
>> level. However I agree with Vitaly that KVM_GET_* should be allowed.
>
> On the topic of feedback from Vitaly, while dredging through my mailbox I
> rediscovered his suggestion of kvm->kvm_internal_bug (or maybe just
> kvm->internal_bug) instead of kvm->vm_bugged[*].
Also agrees with KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR.
>> The other question is whether to return -EIO or KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR.
>> The latter is more likely to be handled already by userspace.
>
> And probably less confusing for unsuspecting users. E.g. -EIO is most
> likely to be interpreted as "I screwed up", whereas KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR
> will correctly be read as "KVM screwed up".
All good points, seems like you have enough review material for the
non-RFC version.
Paolo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Huacai Chen <chenhc@lemote.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] KVM: x86: Use KVM_BUG/KVM_BUG_ON to handle bugs that are fatal to the VM
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:15:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c195f6b4-c714-16e3-879f-0196540e1987@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200929035257.GH31514@linux.intel.com>
On 29/09/20 05:52, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> I think usage should be limited to dangerous cases, basically WARN_ON
>> level. However I agree with Vitaly that KVM_GET_* should be allowed.
>
> On the topic of feedback from Vitaly, while dredging through my mailbox I
> rediscovered his suggestion of kvm->kvm_internal_bug (or maybe just
> kvm->internal_bug) instead of kvm->vm_bugged[*].
Also agrees with KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR.
>> The other question is whether to return -EIO or KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR.
>> The latter is more likely to be handled already by userspace.
>
> And probably less confusing for unsuspecting users. E.g. -EIO is most
> likely to be interpreted as "I screwed up", whereas KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR
> will correctly be read as "KVM screwed up".
All good points, seems like you have enough review material for the
non-RFC version.
Paolo
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Huacai Chen <chenhc@lemote.com>,
Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] KVM: x86: Use KVM_BUG/KVM_BUG_ON to handle bugs that are fatal to the VM
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 09:15:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c195f6b4-c714-16e3-879f-0196540e1987@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200929035257.GH31514@linux.intel.com>
On 29/09/20 05:52, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> I think usage should be limited to dangerous cases, basically WARN_ON
>> level. However I agree with Vitaly that KVM_GET_* should be allowed.
>
> On the topic of feedback from Vitaly, while dredging through my mailbox I
> rediscovered his suggestion of kvm->kvm_internal_bug (or maybe just
> kvm->internal_bug) instead of kvm->vm_bugged[*].
Also agrees with KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR.
>> The other question is whether to return -EIO or KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR.
>> The latter is more likely to be handled already by userspace.
>
> And probably less confusing for unsuspecting users. E.g. -EIO is most
> likely to be interpreted as "I screwed up", whereas KVM_EXIT_INTERNAL_ERROR
> will correctly be read as "KVM screwed up".
All good points, seems like you have enough review material for the
non-RFC version.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-29 9:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-23 22:45 [RFC PATCH 0/3] KVM: Introduce "VM bugged" concept Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] KVM: Export kvm_make_all_cpus_request() for use in marking VMs as bugged Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] KVM: Add infrastructure and macro to mark VM " Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] KVM: x86: Use KVM_BUG/KVM_BUG_ON to handle bugs that are fatal to the VM Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-23 22:45 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-24 12:34 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-24 12:34 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-24 12:34 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-24 18:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-25 9:50 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-25 9:50 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-25 9:50 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-09-25 17:12 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-25 17:12 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-25 17:12 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-25 21:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-09-25 21:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-09-25 21:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-09-29 3:52 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-29 3:52 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-29 3:52 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-29 9:15 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2020-09-29 9:15 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-09-29 9:15 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-09-24 6:37 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] KVM: Introduce "VM bugged" concept Christian Borntraeger
2020-09-24 6:37 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-09-24 6:37 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-09-25 16:32 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-09-25 16:32 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-09-25 16:32 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-09-25 17:00 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-25 17:00 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-25 17:00 ` Sean Christopherson
2020-09-25 21:05 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-09-25 21:05 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-09-25 21:05 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-09-29 9:27 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-09-29 9:27 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-09-29 9:27 ` Cornelia Huck
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=c195f6b4-c714-16e3-879f-0196540e1987@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=chenhc@lemote.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.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 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.