On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 03:09:23PM +0200, Janosch Frank wrote:
> On 9/8/20 3:06 PM, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 09:05:04AM -0400, Janosch Frank wrote:
> >> Program exception 3f (secure storage violation) can only be detected
> >> when the CPU is running in SIE with a format 4 state description,
> >> e.g. running a protected guest. Because of this and because user
> >> space partly controls the guest memory mapping and can trigger this
> >> exception, we want to send a SIGSEGV to the process running the guest
> >> and not panic the kernel.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> CC: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 5.7+
> >> Fixes: 084ea4d611a3 ("s390/mm: add (non)secure page access exceptions handlers")
> >> Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> arch/s390/kernel/entry.h | 1 +
> >> arch/s390/kernel/pgm_check.S | 2 +-
> >> arch/s390/mm/fault.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > I guess this should go upstream via the s390 tree?
>
> Christian asked the exact same question.
> I think we picked the secure/non-secure exception handlers via the s390
> tree so bringing these in via s390 would be in line with that.
>
> > Should I pick this up?
>
> That would be nice
Done.
