[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8635ahpu1y.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 13:52:25 +0000
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Reiji Watanabe <reijiw@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: arm64: selftests: Fixes for single-step test
On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 00:23:48 +0000,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Marc,
>
> I would like to route this through Paolo's tree/queue for 6.2 along with
> a big pile of other selftests updates. I am hoping to get the selftests
> pile queued sooner than later as there is a lot of active development in
> that area, and don't want to have the selftests be in a broken state.
> I'm going to send Paolo a pull request shortly, I'll Cc you (and others)
> to keep everyone in the loop and give a chance for objections.
>
>
>
> Fix a typo and an imminenent not-technically-a-bug bug in the single-step
> test where executing an atomic sequence in the guest with single-step
> enable will hang the guest due to eret clearing the local exclusive
> monitor.
>
>
> Sean Christopherson (2):
> KVM: arm64: selftests: Disable single-step with correct KVM define
> KVM: arm64: selftests: Disable single-step without relying on ucall()
I'm obviously late to the party, but hey... For the record:
Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists