linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [2/2] KVM: Add VT-x machine check support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:07:27 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, ying.huang@...el.com,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2/2] KVM: Add VT-x machine check support

On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 04:49:50PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>There's no good place as it breaks the nice exit handler table.  You 
> >>could put it in vmx_complete_interrupts() next to NMI handling.
> >>    
> >
> >I think I came up with a easy cheesy but not too bad solution now that 
> >should work. It simply remembers the CPU in the vcpu structure and 
> >schedules back to it. That's fine for this purpose. 
> >  
> 
> We might be able schedule back in a timely manner.  Why not hack 
> vmx_complete_interrupts()?  You're still in the critical section so 
> you're guaranteed no delays or surprises.

Yes, have to do that. My original scheme was too risky because
the Machine checks have synchronization mechanisms now and 
preemption has no time limit.

I'll hack on it later today, hope fully have a patch tomorrow.

-Andi


-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/