Date:   Fri, 27 Jan 2023 11:37:38 +0100
From:   Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@amd.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [Question PATCH kernel] x86/amd/sev/nmi+vc: Fix stack handling
 (why is this happening?)
Message-ID: <Y9OpcoSacyOkPkvl@8bytes.org>
References: <20230127035616.508966-1-aik@amd.com>
 <Y9OUfofjxDtTmwyV@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y9OUfofjxDtTmwyV@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 10:08:14AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Welcome to the wonderful shit show that is x86 exceptions :/
> 
> I thought sev_es_*() is supposed to fix this. Joerg, any clue?

Hmm, no, not yet, the stack-trace doesn't make much sense to me. The
sev_es_* function calls in the NMI path are for re-enabling NMI and
adjusting the #VC IST stack to allow nested VCs.

Alexey, can you try to get a more stable backtrace? For example by
building the kernel with frame pointers?

Regards,

	Joerg