Re: [PATCH v8 00/25] KVM: arm64: SMMUv3 driver for pKVM (trap and emulate)

[Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 01:12:33PM +0000, Mostafa Saleh wrote:
> Notes about Sashiko
> ===================
> I ran Sashiko locally and it was helpful in discovering problems in
> the series. However, it still shows large number of critical and high
> severity issues, I went through them and I believe they are false
> positives, mainly because (in the order of frequently reported):
> - It doesn't understand WARNs are fatal in the hypervisor.
> - It doesn't understand that a malicious host can DoS the system and
>   pKVM doesn't guarantee availability
> - It doesn't understand the SMMUv3 spec and makes stuff up (eg. about
>   CMD_SYC CS field it makes up an non-existent encoding or wrong
>   semantics for the gbpa register)

Just my two cents here:

From my experience, making commit messages or inline notes slightly
clearer against the findings that Sashiko reported could simply help
it understand things better and mute most of the false positives.

Otherwise, the number of the findings is a bit scaring; reviewers
would have to go through the long list of findings to check whether
each of them fits into one of the false-positive categories :-/

> - It seems to look at one patch at a time and not the whole series, and
>   as the series is written in a way to be bisectable that confuses it.

Yea, that happens too. Usually I would add a line at the end of the
commit message "a subsequent change will do X", which could clarify.

Nicolin