On 23.07.25 10:50, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 7/23/2025 4:42 PM, Xiaoyao Li wrote: >> On 7/23/2025 3:53 PM, Mathias Krause wrote: >>> Bleh, I just noticed that there are KUT tests that actually rely on the >>> feature[1]. I'll fix these but, looks like, we need to default on for >>> the feature -- at least for existing machine definitions 🙁 >> >> You reminds me. >> >> There is also even a specific KUT hypercall.c, and default off fails >> it as well. >> >> enabling apic >> smp: waiting for 0 APs >> Hypercall via VMCALL: OK >> Unhandled exception 6 #UD at ip 00000000004003dd >> error_code=0000 rflags=00010002 cs=00000008 >> rax=00000000ffffffff rcx=00000000000003fd rdx=00000000000003f8 >> rbx=0000000000000001 >> rbp=0000000000710ff0 rsi=00000000007107b1 rdi=000000000000000a >> r8=00000000007107b1 r9=00000000000003f8 r10=000000000000000d >> r11=0000000000000020 >> r12=0000000000000001 r13=0000000000000000 r14=0000000000000000 >> r15=0000000000000000 >> cr0=0000000080000011 cr2=0000000000000000 cr3=000000000040c000 >> cr4=0000000000000020 >> cr8=0000000000000000 >> STACK: @4003dd 4001ad > >>> Looks like I have to go the compat property route. > > BTW, the compat property doesn't fix KUT issues actually. > > Since KUT doesn't use versioned machine, instead of it always uses the > latest machine. KUT should be good with [1]. However, other similar mini-guests probably still want the patching. :/ Thanks, Mathias [1] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20250724191050.1988675-1-minipli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
