[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c79eaf34-766e-4637-aa09-7eebbec26e0d@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2026 16:28:54 -0800
From: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<kvm@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <seanjc@...gle.com>, <x86@...nel.org>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86/fpu: Clear XSTATE_BV[i] in save state whenever
XFD[i]=1
On 1/1/2026 1:05 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> Therefore, XFD can only go out of sync with XSTATE_BV in the above
> interrupt case, or in similar scenarios involving preemption on
This seems to restate the scenario already described above; I’m not sure
whether the repetition is intentional.
> preemptible kernels, and it we can consider it (de facto) part of KVM
^^^^^
I assume you meant 'we' here though, you might want to slightly rephrase
it, given the previous debate:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/87iko54f42.ffs@tglx/
> ABI that KVM_GET_XSAVE returns XSTATE_BV[i]=0 for XFD-disabled features.
On my side, testing on AMX systems, I was able to reproduce the issue
described and confirm that this patch resolves it:
Tested-by: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
The added guards on these paths also look reasonable to me with the
established KVM ABI. So,
Reviewed-by: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
Thanks,
Chang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists