From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965193AbcCOK0u (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Mar 2016 06:26:50 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:36278 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932675AbcCOK0l (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Mar 2016 06:26:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 11:26:31 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Linus Torvalds , Paolo Bonzini , xen-devel , Arjan van de Ven , Borislav Petkov , X86 ML , Andrew Morton , KVM list , Andy Lutomirski , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] x86/msr: Carry on after a non-"safe" MSR access fails without !panic_on_oops Message-ID: <20160315102631.GA27227@gmail.com> References: <20160315102230.GB23406@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160315102230.GB23406@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Linus Torvalds > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > >> > > >> The code in my queue is, literally: > > >> > > >> bool ex_handler_rdmsr_unsafe(const struct exception_table_entry *fixup, > > >> struct pt_regs *regs, int trapnr) > > >> { > > >> WARN_ONCE(1, "unchecked MSR access error: RDMSR from 0x%x", > > >> (unsigned int)regs->cx); > > >> > > >> /* Pretend that the read succeeded and returned 0. */ > > >> regs->ip = ex_fixup_addr(fixup); > > >> regs->ax = 0; > > >> regs->dx = 0; > > >> return true; > > >> } > > >> EXPORT_SYMBOL(ex_handler_rdmsr_unsafe); > > > > > > I guess I can live with this, as long as we also extend the > > > early-fault handling to work with the special exception handlers. > > > > OK, will do. I need to rewrork the early IDT code a bit so it > > generates a real pt_regs layout, but that's arguably a cleanup anyway. > > Ok, with that's I'm pretty happy about it as well. Note, I think it's pretty clear at this point that this is v4.7 material. Thanks, Ingo