On 5/13/24 17:19, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
+static int snp_begin_ext_guest_req(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+ int vmm_ret = SNP_GUEST_VMM_ERR_GENERIC;
+ struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
+ unsigned long data_npages;
+ sev_ret_code fw_err;
+ gpa_t data_gpa;
+
+ if (!sev_snp_guest(vcpu->kvm))
+ goto abort_request;
+
+ data_gpa = vcpu->arch.regs[VCPU_REGS_RAX];
+ data_npages = vcpu->arch.regs[VCPU_REGS_RBX];
+
+ if (!IS_ALIGNED(data_gpa, PAGE_SIZE))
+ goto abort_request;
[...]
+abort_request:
+ ghcb_set_sw_exit_info_2(svm->sev_es.ghcb, SNP_GUEST_ERR(vmm_ret, fw_err));
+ return 1; /* resume guest */
+}
This patch is now in -next as commit 32fde9e18b3f ("KVM: SEV: Provide
support for SNP_EXTENDED_GUEST_REQUEST NAE event"), where it causes a
clang warning (or hard error when CONFIG_WERROR is enabled) [...]
Seems legitimate to me. What was the intention here?
Mike, I think this should just be 0?
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c
index c7a0971149f2..affb4fb47f91 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/sev.c
@@ -3911,7 +3911,6 @@ static int snp_begin_ext_guest_req(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
int vmm_ret = SNP_GUEST_VMM_ERR_GENERIC;
struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
unsigned long data_npages;
- sev_ret_code fw_err;
gpa_t data_gpa;
if (!sev_snp_guest(vcpu->kvm))
@@ -3938,7 +3937,7 @@ static int snp_begin_ext_guest_req(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
return 0; /* forward request to userspace */
abort_request:
- ghcb_set_sw_exit_info_2(svm->sev_es.ghcb, SNP_GUEST_ERR(vmm_ret, fw_err));
+ ghcb_set_sw_exit_info_2(svm->sev_es.ghcb, SNP_GUEST_ERR(vmm_ret, 0));
return 1; /* resume guest */
}
Paolo
