[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YMxYYkawXh1kZ/jf@suse.de>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 10:25:06 +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 <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Martin Radev <martin.b.radev@...il.com>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] x86/sev: Make sure IRQs are disabled while GHCB
is active
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 05:00:48PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I think this is broken, at this point RCU is quite dead on this CPU and
> local_irq_save/restore include tracing and all sorts.
>
> Also, shouldn't IRQs already be disabled by the time we get here?
Yes it is, I removed these calls, made __sev_get/put_ghcb() noinstr
instead of __always_inline and put instrumentation_begin()/end() around
the panic() call in __sev_get_ghcb().
Regards,
Joerg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists