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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).