On 01/03/17 02:31, Xiongfeng Wang wrote: [lot of things] > If an SEA is injected into guest OS, the guest OS will jump to the SEA > exception entry when the context switched to guest OS. And the CPSR and > FAR_EL1 are recovered according to the content of vcpu. Then the guest > OS can signal a process or panic. If another guest process read the > error data, another SEA will be generated and it will be single too. > > Without QEMU involved, the drawback is that no APEI table can be mocked > up in guest OS, and no memory_failure() will be called. So the memory of > error data will be released into buddy system and assigned to another > process. If the error was caused by instantaneous radiation or > electromagnetic, the memory is usable again if it is written with a > correct data. If the memory has wore out and a correct data is written, > the ECC error may occurs again with high possibility. Before a 2-bit ECC > error is reported, much more 1-bit errors will be reported. This is > report to host os, the host os can determine the memory node has worn > out and hot-plug out the memory node, and guest os may be terminated if > its memory data can't be migrated. > > Of course, it is better to get QEMU involved, so the memory_failure can > be executed in guest OS. But before that implemented, can we add SEA > injection in kvm_handle_guest_abort()? No. I will strongly object to that. This is a platform decision to forward SEAs, not an architectural one. The core KVM code is only concerned about implementing the ARM architecture, and not something that is firmware dependent. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
