On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 10:20:11AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 09:15:54AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
The result is that this change is turning a perfectly valid HYP VA into... something. Odds are that the masking/patching will not mess up the address, but this is completely buggy anyway. In general, kern_hyp_va() is not an idempotent operation.
IIUC today it *happens* to be idempotent, but as you say that is not guaranteed to remain the case, and this is definitely a logical bug.
I think so, yes. I suspect the idempotency confused me.
Greg, it may be more prudent to unstage this series from 6.12-stable until we know for sure this is the only problem.
As above, likewise with the v6.13 version.
Yes, please unstage these. I'll send out new versions.