Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/entry/64: Do not clear %rbx under Xen
To:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, x86@kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
References: <20180721194909.23903-1-m.v.b@runbox.com>
 <5a21b844-36a9-8fe4-c6cd-6fade3dfa941@oracle.com>
From:   "M. Vefa Bicakci" <m.v.b@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <6426e7a4-2da0-9a36-298a-89e956e98812@runbox.com>
Date:   Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:18:42 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5a21b844-36a9-8fe4-c6cd-6fade3dfa941@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-CA
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 07/21/2018 05:19 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 07/21/2018 03:49 PM, M. Vefa Bicakci wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
>> index c7449f377a77..96e8ff34129e 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
>> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
>> @@ -1129,7 +1129,7 @@ ENTRY(xen_failsafe_callback)
>>   	addq	$0x30, %rsp
>>   	UNWIND_HINT_IRET_REGS
>>   	pushq	$-1 /* orig_ax = -1 => not a system call */
>> -	PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS
>> +	PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS clear_rbx=0
> 
> 
> Do we need this at all? We are returning from the hypervisor here.
> 
> -boris
> 
>>   	ENCODE_FRAME_POINTER
>>   	jmp	error_exit
>>   END(xen_failsafe_callback)

Hello Boris,

If you are referring to the PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS macro itself, I am not sure;
however, not clearing the RBX register seemed to resolve the issues mentioned
in the commit message for me. Given Andy's comment though, I believe that the
approach in this patch may not be correct.

Thank you,

Vefa