Am 12.05.22 um 15:10 schrieb Janis Schoetterl-Glausch:
If a memop fails due to key checked protection, after already having written to the guest, don't indicate suppression to the guest, as that would imply that memory wasn't modified. This could be considered a fix to the code introducing storage key support, however this is a bug in KVM only if we emulate an instructions writing to an operand spanning multiple pages, which I don't believe we do. v2 -> v3 * tweak commit message * explicitly reset the protection code to 0 on termination * use variable to pass termination arg * add documentation * fix magic constant in selftest Given the changes I did not pick up the r-b's.
Claudio, you had reviewed the first one. Is this still valid?
