>> What you may be seeing is some awkwardness with the change in the SError ESR >> with v8.2. Previously the VSE mechanism injected an impdef SError, (but they >> were all impdef so it didn't matter). >> With VSESR_EL2 KVM has to specify one, and all-zeros is a bad choice as this >> means 'classified as a RAS error ... unknown!'. >> >> I have a patch in the upcoming SError/RAS series that changes KVMs virtual-abort >> code to specify an impdef ESR for this path. > Before I remember Marc and you suggest me specify the an impdef ESR (set the vsesr_el2) in > the userspace, I pasted Marc's propose and your suggestion that set VSESR_EL2(specify virtual SError syndrome) by the user space. https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/20/441 https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/20/516 > now do you want to specify an impdef ESR in KVM instead of usrspace? > if setting the vsesr_el2 in the KVM, whether user-space need to specify? > May be we can combine the patches that specify an impdef ESR(set vsesr_el2) patch to one. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
