linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] KVM: Enable Nested Virt selftests

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

Message-ID: <86a56veiyy.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 12:48:05 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gankulkarni@...amperecomputing.com>
Cc: Eric Auger <eauger@...hat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	oliver.upton@...ux.dev,
	joey.gouly@....com,
	suzuki.poulose@....com,
	yuzenghui@...wei.com,
	seanjc@...gle.com,
	darren@...amperecomputing.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] KVM: Enable Nested Virt selftests

On Thu, 29 May 2025 11:29:58 +0100,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gankulkarni@...amperecomputing.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Eric,
> 
> On 5/28/2025 6:58 PM, Eric Auger wrote:
> > Hi Ganapatrao,
> > 
> > On 5/12/25 12:52 PM, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> >> This patch series makes the selftest work with NV enabled. The guest code
> >> is run in vEL2 instead of EL1. We add a command line option to enable
> >> testing of NV. The NV tests are disabled by default.
> > 
> > For commodity, I would add in the coverletter that for all tests
> > enhanced with vEL2 testing "-g 1" option shall be added to force that mode.
> 
> Sure, will do.
> 
> > 
> > I don't really get how you chose tests capable to run at vEL2 and
> > excluded others? Wouldn't it make sense to have a way to run all tests
> > in either mode?
> There is no selection as such. I have worked on around 50% of the tests and sent for the early review.
> Yes, almost all tests can/should run in vEL2 except few.

Define EL2. You are so far assuming a E2H RES1 guest, and I don't see
anything that is even trying E2H RES0. After all the complaining that
E2H0 wasn't initially supported, this is a bit... disappointing.

Also, running EL2 is the least of our worries, because that's pretty
easy to deal with. It is running at EL1/0 when EL2 is present that is
interesting, and I see no coverage on that front.

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.