Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 29 Apr 2022 14:03:23 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-5.18] KVM: fix bad user ABI for KVM_EXIT_SYSTEM_EVENT
Message-ID: <YmvwK0MeKpsQkZN4@google.com>
References: <20220422103013.34832-1-pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220422103013.34832-1-pbonzini@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 22, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> For compatibility with userspace that was using the flags field,
> a union overlaps flags with data[0].

I think "compatibility" is slightly misleading, e.g. the offset of the field is
changing for 32-bit userspace. 

  To avoid breaking compilation of userspace that was using the flags
  field, provide a userspace-only union to overlap flags with data[0].

> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> index 91a6fe4e02c0..f903ab0c8d7a 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> @@ -445,7 +445,11 @@ struct kvm_run {
>  #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET          2
>  #define KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_CRASH          3
>  			__u32 type;
> -			__u64 flags;
> +			__u32 ndata;
> +			union {
> +				__u64 flags;

As alluded to above, what about wrapping flags in 

#ifndef __KERNEL__
				__u64 flags;
#endif

so that KVM doesn't try to use flags?

> +				__u64 data[16];
> +			};
>  		} system_event;
>  		/* KVM_EXIT_S390_STSI */
>  		struct {