[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240911204158.2034295-6-seanjc@google.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 13:41:50 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>, Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 05/13] KVM: selftests: Check for a potential unhandled
exception iff KVM_RUN succeeded
Don't check for an unhandled exception if KVM_RUN failed, e.g. if it
returned errno=EFAULT, as reporting unhandled exceptions is done via a
ucall, i.e. requires KVM_RUN to exit cleanly. Theoretically, checking
for a ucall on a failed KVM_RUN could get a false positive, e.g. if there
were stale data in vcpu->run from a previous exit.
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
index 56b170b725b3..0e25011d9b51 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/kvm_util.c
@@ -1719,7 +1719,8 @@ int _vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
rc = __vcpu_run(vcpu);
} while (rc == -1 && errno == EINTR);
- assert_on_unhandled_exception(vcpu);
+ if (!rc)
+ assert_on_unhandled_exception(vcpu);
return rc;
}
--
2.46.0.598.g6f2099f65c-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists