[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200715091337.GI16200@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 11:13:37 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Cfir Cohen <cfir@...gle.com>,
Erdem Aktas <erdemaktas@...gle.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Mike Stunes <mstunes@...are.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Martin Radev <martin.b.radev@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 63/75] x86/sev-es: Handle #DB Events
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:47:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 02:09:05PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>
> > @@ -1028,6 +1036,16 @@ DEFINE_IDTENTRY_VC_SAFE_STACK(exc_vmm_communication)
> > struct ghcb *ghcb;
> >
> > lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * #DB is special and needs to be handled outside of the intrumentation_begin()/end().
> > + * Otherwise the #VC handler could be raised recursivly.
> > + */
> > + if (error_code == SVM_EXIT_EXCP_BASE + X86_TRAP_DB) {
> > + vc_handle_trap_db(regs);
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
> > instrumentation_begin();
>
> Wait what?! That makes no sense what so ever.
Then my understanding of intrumentation_begin/end() is wrong, I thought
that the kernel will forbid setting breakpoints before
instrumentation_begin(), which is necessary here because a break-point
in the #VC handler might cause recursive #VC-exceptions when #DB is
intercepted.
Maybe you can elaborate on why this makes no sense?
Regards,
Joerg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists