Potentially, the guests could trigger a debug exception that's
outside the exception class range. This could lead to an
excessive syslog flooding. Hence, ratelimit the error message.
Signed-off-by: Raghavendra Rao Ananta <redacted>
---
arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
index 04ebab299aa4..c7cec7ffe93c 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ static int kvm_handle_guest_debug(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
case ESR_ELx_EC_BRK64:
break;
default:
- kvm_err("%s: un-handled case esr: %#08x\n",
+ kvm_pr_unimpl("%s: un-handled case esr: %#08x\n",
__func__, (unsigned int) esr);
ret = -1;
break;--
2.33.0.rc2.250.ged5fa647cd-goog
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 23:34:06 +0100,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta [off-list ref] wrote:
Potentially, the guests could trigger a debug exception that's
outside the exception class range.
How? All the exception classes that lead to this functions are already
handled in the switch/case statement.
quoted hunk
This could lead to an excessive syslog flooding. Hence, ratelimit
the error message.
Signed-off-by: Raghavendra Rao Ananta <redacted>
---
arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
index 04ebab299aa4..c7cec7ffe93c 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ static int kvm_handle_guest_debug(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
case ESR_ELx_EC_BRK64:
break;
default:
- kvm_err("%s: un-handled case esr: %#08x\n",
+ kvm_pr_unimpl("%s: un-handled case esr: %#08x\n",
__func__, (unsigned int) esr);
ret = -1;
break;
My take on this is that this code isn't reachable, and that it could
be better rewritten as:
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
index 6f48336b1d86..ae7ec086827b 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/handle_exit.c
@@ -119,28 +119,14 @@ static int kvm_handle_guest_debug(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
struct kvm_run *run = vcpu->run;
u32 esr = kvm_vcpu_get_esr(vcpu);
- int ret = 0;
run->exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_DEBUG;
run->debug.arch.hsr = esr;
- switch (ESR_ELx_EC(esr)) {
- case ESR_ELx_EC_WATCHPT_LOW:
+ if (ESR_ELx_EC(esr) == ESR_ELx_EC_WATCHPT_LOW)
run->debug.arch.far = vcpu->arch.fault.far_el2;
- fallthrough;
- case ESR_ELx_EC_SOFTSTP_LOW:
- case ESR_ELx_EC_BREAKPT_LOW:
- case ESR_ELx_EC_BKPT32:
- case ESR_ELx_EC_BRK64:
- break;
- default:
- kvm_err("%s: un-handled case esr: %#08x\n",
- __func__, (unsigned int) esr);
- ret = -1;
- break;
- }
- return ret;
+ return 0;
}
static int kvm_handle_unknown_ec(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel