Date:   Wed, 01 Feb 2023 14:48:03 +0000
Message-ID: <86bkmd1ly4.wl-maz@kernel.org>
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To:     Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
        Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
        Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
        kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: arm64: Fix CPU resume/on with pKVM
In-Reply-To: <20230201103755.1398086-1-qperret@google.com>
References: <20230201103755.1398086-1-qperret@google.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue)
 FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/28.2
 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 10:37:50 +0000,
Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> 
> When using pKVM, we do not reset the EL2 exception vectors back to the
> stubs for e.g. Power Management or CPU hotplug as we normally do in KVM.
> As consequence, the initialisation perfomed by __finalise_el2 is missing
> on e.g. the CPU_RESUME path with pKVM, hence leaving certain registers
> in an incorrect state.
> 
> One such example is ZCR_EL2 which remains configured with SVE traps
> enabled. And so using SVE on a CPU that has gone through a hotplug
> off/on cycle leads to a hyp panic. Not good.
> 
> This series fixes this by macroizing the first half of __finalise_el2
> (that is, the part that is not specific to VHE) to allow its re-use
> from pKVM's PSCI relay.

For the series:

Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>

I think it might be a bit late to send this as fixes for 6.2 (my
latest pull request for kvmarm-fixes-6.2-3 is still in limbo), so I'd
suggest we take it for 6.3.

How do you want to deal with the backports? None of the patches have a
Cc: stable, and only the last one has a Fixes: tag, but cannot be
applied standalone.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.