Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Dirtying, failing memop: don't indicate suppression

[Christian Borntraeger]

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?