Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 May 2022 14:28:25 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Dirtying, failing memop: don't indicate suppression | From | Christian Borntraeger <> |
| |
Am 12.05.22 um 15:10 schrieb Janis Schoetterl-Glausch: > If a memop fails due to key checked protection, after already having > written to the guest, don't indicate suppression to the guest, as that > would imply that memory wasn't modified. > > This could be considered a fix to the code introducing storage key > support, however this is a bug in KVM only if we emulate an > instructions writing to an operand spanning multiple pages, which I > don't believe we do. > > v2 -> v3 > * tweak commit message > * explicitly reset the protection code to 0 on termination > * use variable to pass termination arg > * add documentation > * fix magic constant in selftest > > Given the changes I did not pick up the r-b's.
Claudio, you had reviewed the first one. Is this still valid?
| |