On 6/27/25 08:23, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 19/06/2025 14:57, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>> On 18/06/2025 17:55, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> On 6/18/25 05:08, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c
>>>> @@ -1665,7 +1665,8 @@ noinstr void do_machine_check(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>>> * be added to free list when the guest is terminated.
>>>> */
>>>> if (mce_usable_address(m)) {
>>>> - struct page *p = pfn_to_online_page(m->addr >> PAGE_SHIFT);
>>>> + unsigned long pfn = (m->addr & MCI_ADDR_PHYSADDR) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>>>> + struct page *p = pfn_to_online_page(pfn);
>>> If ->addr isn't really an address that software can do much with,
>>> shouldn't we mask MCI_ADDR_PHYSADDR off up front, like in mce_read_aux()?
>> Would that mean no one would know if the mce addr had KeyID bits or not?
Uhhh, just store the KeyID separately. Have
mce->addr
and
mce->keyid
Problem solved.
