On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 10:49:04AM -0700, Anish Moorthy wrote: > On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 4:44 PM Anish Moorthy <amoorthy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 3:35 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Yeah, when I speed read the series, several of the conversions stood out as being > > > "wrong". My (potentially unstated) idea was that KVM would only signal > > > KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT when the -EFAULT could be traced back to a user access, > > > i.e. when the fault _might_ be resolvable by userspace. > > > > Sean, besides direct_map which other patches did you notice as needing > > to be dropped/marked as unrecoverable errors? > > I tried going through on my own to try and identify the incorrect > annotations: here's my read. > > Correct (or can easily be corrected) > ----------------------------------------------- > - user_mem_abort > Incorrect as is: the annotations in patch 19 are incorrect, as they > cover an error-on-no-slot case and one more I don't fully understand: That other case is a wart we endearingly refer to as MTE (Memory Tagging Extension). You theoretically _could_ pop out an annotated exit here, as userspace likely messed up the mapping (like PROT_MTE missing). But I'm perfectly happy letting someone complain about it before we go out of our way to annotate that one. So feel free to drop. -- Thanks, Oliver
