On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 4:58 PM Ira Weiny ira.weiny@intel.com wrote:
Sagi Shahar wrote:
[snip]
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86/processor.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86/processor.c index b2a4b11ac8c0..1eae92957456 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86/processor.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86/processor.c @@ -687,12 +687,9 @@ void vcpu_arch_set_entry_point(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, void *guest_code) vcpu_regs_set(vcpu, ®s); }
-struct kvm_vcpu *vm_arch_vcpu_add(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpu_id) +vm_vaddr_t kvm_allocate_vcpu_stack(struct kvm_vm *vm) {
struct kvm_mp_state mp_state;
struct kvm_regs regs; vm_vaddr_t stack_vaddr;
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu; stack_vaddr = __vm_vaddr_alloc(vm, DEFAULT_STACK_PGS * getpagesize(), DEFAULT_GUEST_STACK_VADDR_MIN,
@@ -713,6 +710,15 @@ struct kvm_vcpu *vm_arch_vcpu_add(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpu_id) "__vm_vaddr_alloc() did not provide a page-aligned address"); stack_vaddr -= 8;
return stack_vaddr;
+}
+struct kvm_vcpu *vm_arch_vcpu_add(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpu_id) +{
struct kvm_mp_state mp_state;
struct kvm_regs regs;
struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
vcpu = __vm_vcpu_add(vm, vcpu_id); vcpu_init_cpuid(vcpu, kvm_get_supported_cpuid()); vcpu_init_sregs(vm, vcpu);
@@ -721,7 +727,8 @@ struct kvm_vcpu *vm_arch_vcpu_add(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpu_id) /* Setup guest general purpose registers */ vcpu_regs_get(vcpu, ®s); regs.rflags = regs.rflags | 0x2;
regs.rsp = stack_vaddr;
if (vm->type != KVM_X86_TDX_VM)
regs.rsp = kvm_allocate_vcpu_stack(vm);
At this point in the series vm->type can't be KVM_X86_TDX_VM correct?
So that makes this safe during bisect?
I double checked and no one is creating VMs with KVM_X86_TDX_VM. The first test that sets KVM_X86_TDX_VM is the last patch in the series.
Ira
vcpu_regs_set(vcpu, ®s); /* Setup the MP state */
-- 2.51.0.rc1.193.gad69d77794-goog