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;
Message-ID: <904ecd64fb5d0ae3512bb595ea326383e4099d54.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: selftests: restore special vmmcall code layout
 needed by the harness
From:   mlevitsk@redhat.com
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Wed, 28 Dec 2022 11:53:29 +0200
In-Reply-To: <3e0678e3ce57f3972945d2523ca66b9bc1d1e720.camel@redhat.com>
References: <20221130181147.9911-1-pbonzini@redhat.com>
         <Y4ffgC+HbftkPbaW@google.com> <87r0xjh3qk.fsf@ovpn-194-141.brq.redhat.com>
         <3e0678e3ce57f3972945d2523ca66b9bc1d1e720.camel@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.5 (3.36.5-2.fc32) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2022-12-01 at 15:48 +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-12-01 at 10:28 +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> > Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes:
> > 
> > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > > Commit 8fda37cf3d41 ("KVM: selftests: Stuff RAX/RCX with 'safe' values
> > > > in vmmcall()/vmcall()", 2022-11-21) broke the svm_nested_soft_inject_test
> > > > because it placed a "pop rbp" instruction after vmmcall.  While this is
> > > > correct and mimics what is done in the VMX case, this particular test
> > > > expects a ud2 instruction right after the vmmcall, so that it can skip
> > > > over it in the L1 part of the test.
> > > > 
> > > > Inline a suitably-modified version of vmmcall() to restore the
> > > > functionality of the test.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 8fda37cf3d41 ("KVM: selftests: Stuff RAX/RCX with 'safe' values in vmmcall()/vmcall()"
> > > > Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > We really, really need to save/restore guest GPRs in L1 when handling exits from L2.
> > 
> > +1, the amount of stuff we do to workaround the shortcoming (and time
> > we waste debugging) is getting ridiculously high. 
> > 
> > > For now,
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> > > 
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
> > 
> 
> I didn't notice this fix and also found this issue.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>
> 
> Best regards,
> 	Maxim Levitsky

Seems that this patch got through the cracks,
pinging so someone else won't need to debug this
test too.

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky