linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] KVM: RISC-V: remove unnecessary SBI reset state

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAAhSdy0-9OQmBf2VkJJFb+Gmwk3hmNapkjvJYvT06CG9eULDgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 18:41:08 +0530
From: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
To: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...tanamicro.com>
Cc: kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, 
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, 
	Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>, Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>, 
	Mayuresh Chitale <mchitale@...tanamicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] KVM: RISC-V: remove unnecessary SBI reset state

On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 3:32 PM Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...tanamicro.com> wrote:
>
> 2025-05-08T11:48:00+05:30, Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>:
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 5:02 PM Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...tanamicro.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The SBI reset state has only two variables -- pc and a1.
> >> The rest is known, so keep only the necessary information.
> >>
> >> The reset structures make sense if we want userspace to control the
> >> reset state (which we do), but I'd still remove them now and reintroduce
> >> with the userspace interface later -- we could probably have just a
> >> single reset state per VM, instead of a reset state for each VCPU.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...tanamicro.com>
> >
> > Queued this patch for Linux-6.16
>
> [5/5] was already applied, which means that [3/5] would be nicer with
>
>   memset(&vcpu->arch.smstateen_csr, 0, sizeof(vcpu->arch.smstateen_csr));
>
> in the new function (kvm_riscv_vcpu_context_reset) where we memset(0)
> the other csr context.
>
> Should I add a patch to do that in v2?

Yes, please add it to your v2. I will update my queue accordingly.

Regards,
Anup