[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a0c99edd584b47ce8f9f8aff86b2a568@amazon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 17:08:32 +0000
From: "Durrant, Paul" <pdurrant@...zon.co.uk>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Paul Durrant <paul@....org>
CC: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: xen: update shared_info when long_mode is set
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> Sent: 01 December 2023 16:46
> To: Paul Durrant <paul@....org>
> Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>; Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>; Thomas Gleixner
> <tglx@...utronix.de>; Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>; Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>; Dave Hansen
> <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>; x86@...nel.org; H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>; kvm@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [PATCH 0/2] KVM: xen: update shared_info when long_mode is set
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open
> attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2023, Paul Durrant wrote:
> > From: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@...zon.com>
> >
> > This series is based on my v9 of my "update shared_info and vcpu_info
> > handling" series [1] and fixes an issue that was latent before the
> > "allow shared_info to be mapped by fixed HVA" patch of that series allowed
> > a VMM to set up shared_info before the VM booted and then leave it alone.
>
> Uh, what? If this is fixing an existing bug then it really shouldn't take a
> dependency on a rather large and non-trivial series. If the bug can only manifest
> as a result of said series, then the fix absolutely belongs in that series.
>
There's been radio silence on that series for a while so I was unsure of the status.
> This change from patch 1 in particular:
>
> -static int kvm_xen_shared_info_init(struct kvm *kvm, u64 addr, bool addr_is_gfn)
> +static int kvm_xen_shared_info_init(struct kvm *kvm)
>
> practically screams for inclusion in that series which does:
>
> -static int kvm_xen_shared_info_init(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)
> +static int kvm_xen_shared_info_init(struct kvm *kvm, u64 addr, bool addr_is_gfn)
>
> Why not get the code right the first time instead of fixing it up in a completely
> different series?
Sure, I can fold it in.
Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists