[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ee19fix7.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2022 09:53:40 -0500
From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Seth Forshee <sforshee@...italocean.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] entry/kvm: Make vCPU tasks exit to userspace when a
livepatch is pending
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> writes:
> On Wed 2022-05-04 08:50:22, Seth Forshee wrote:
>> On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 03:07:53PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
>> > If "no" then I do not understand why TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL interrupts
>> > the syscall on the real hardware and not in kvm.
>>
>> It does interrupt, but xfer_to_guest_mode_handle_work() concludes it's
>> not necessary to return to userspace and resumes guest execution.
>
> In this case, we should revert the commit 8df1947c71ee53c7e21
> ("livepatch: Replace the fake signal sending with TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> infrastructure"). The flag TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL clearly does not guarantee
> restarting the syscall or exiting to the user space with -EINTR.
>
> It should solve this problem. And it looks like a cleaner solution
> to me.
Why not just?
diff --git a/kernel/entry/kvm.c b/kernel/entry/kvm.c
index 9d09f489b60e..cbb192aec13a 100644
--- a/kernel/entry/kvm.c
+++ b/kernel/entry/kvm.c
@@ -8,13 +8,7 @@ static int xfer_to_guest_mode_work(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long ti_work)
do {
int ret;
- if (ti_work & (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)) {
- clear_notify_signal();
- if (task_work_pending(current))
- task_work_run();
- }
-
- if (ti_work & _TIF_SIGPENDING) {
+ if (ti_work & (_TIF_SIGPENDING | _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)) {
kvm_handle_signal_exit(vcpu);
return -EINTR;
}
As far as I can tell the only reason _TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL was handled any
differently than _TIF_SIGPENDING in xfer_to_guest_mode_work is because
of historical confusion.
Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists