Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] KVM/x86: Drop "1" as MSR emulation return value

[David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1168 bytes --]

On Thu, 2026-05-28 at 16:33 +0200, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 28.05.26 15:21, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Thu, May 28, 2026, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> > > On 28.05.26 15:09, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 28, 2026, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > > > Please disregard this series, there is one complication sashiko made me
> > > > > aware of.
> > > > 
> > > > Sashiko beat me to the punch. :-)
> > > > 
> > > > See commit 2368048bf5c2 ("KVM: x86: Signal #GP, not -EPERM, on bad WRMSR(MCi_CTL/STATUS)")
> > > > for a real world example of how things can and will go wrong.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, with Sashiko's pointer it was easy to spot.
> > > 
> > > Question now is whether the already existing cases of -errno passed as return
> > > value are wrong or on purpose.
> > 
> > What are the existing cases?
> 
> Found another one:
> 
> kvm_xen_write_hypercall_page() (called by kvm_set_msr_common())

You mean in the case where it's using the user-provided hypercall page,
and can't copy from the buffer that the VMM provided?

I think that's correct to return -errno via PTR_ERR() and let the guest
die?

The rest return 0 or 1.

[-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5069 bytes --]