On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 04:11:34PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:00:11PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > fb43d6cb91ef x86/mm: Do not auto-massage page protections <--- NOT OK > > Hmm, that hunk from above patch looks suspicious: > > - set_pgd(pgd + pgd_index(restore_jump_address), > __pgd(__pa(pud) | _KERNPG_TABLE)); > + pgd_t new_pgd = __pgd(__pa(p4d) | pgprot_val(pgtable_prot)); > + set_pgd(pgd + pgd_index(restore_jump_address), new_pgd); > > The old code used __pa(pud) while the new one uses __pa(p4d). > > Boris, can you change that back to __pa(pud) and test please?
I had the same problem with v4.17-rc1 and fb43d6cb91ef and the change you suggested applied on top of (a) fb43d6cb91ef with cherry-picked e6f39e87b643 (b) current master (87ef12027b9b) fixes the resume on my system. Michal Kubecek
