On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote: > On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 10:37:54 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 11:21:54AM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote: > > > The 'vmsa' struct was moved out of 'struct vcpu_svm' in linux commit: > > > > > > commit b67a4cc35c9f726999fa29880713ce72d4e39e8d > > > Author: Peter Gonda <pgonda@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Date: Thu Oct 21 10:42:59 2021 -0700 > > > > > > KVM: SEV: Refactor out sev_es_state struct > > > > > > Move SEV-ES vCPU metadata into new sev_es_state struct from vcpu_svm. > > > > > > Also update the line reference for linux-6.3. > > > > > > NB: I strongly considered removing the example as it's impossible to > > > keep in sync. With the warning added by previous commit I think we can > > > give it one more chance. > > > > It sucks, but it sucks less than what every was doing before I > > suggested systemtap, which is to tell people to edit their > > kernel source to add printfs and then rebuild their kernel > > > > Ideally the kernel would expose the pristine expected VMSA > > data in some sane interface like debugfs. > > > > > > > > Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2175598 > > > > In general such bugs should be closed WONTFIX. There is no > > expectation that this demo works on RHEL kernels. At most I > > would worry about upstream kernel, but even that's not very > > critical. This is just a demo of the approach you should take > > not a supported script we expect to work out of the box. > > I agree. I'll close this one. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > examples/systemtap/amd-sev-es-vmsa.stp | 6 +++--- > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/examples/systemtap/amd-sev-es-vmsa.stp b/examples/systemtap/amd-sev-es-vmsa.stp > > > index 14bfb01c10..ab2f202681 100644 > > > --- a/examples/systemtap/amd-sev-es-vmsa.stp > > > +++ b/examples/systemtap/amd-sev-es-vmsa.stp > > > @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ function dump_vmsa(addr:long) { > > > # is the one beween the call to clflush_cache_range(...) and the > > > # call to sev_issue_cmd(kvm, SEV_CMD_LAUNCH_UPDATE...). > > > # > > > -# Line 632 is correct for Linux v6.0 > > > -probe module("kvm_amd").statement("__sev_launch_update_vmsa@arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c:632") { > > > - dump_vmsa($svm->vmsa) > > > +# Line 635 is correct for Linux v6.3 > > > +probe module("kvm_amd").statement("__sev_launch_update_vmsa@arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c:635") { > > > + dump_vmsa($svm->sev_es->vmsa) > > At least the change to this line IMO makes sense from upstream's POV > going forward as the code was refactored and thus the old example will > never work again with new kernels. Yes, I'm fine with changes to this demo program if they're presented simply as following LKML latest git impl. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
