linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM-INTEL: Add new module vmcsinfo-intel to fill VMCSINFO

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

Date:	Fri, 06 Jul 2012 17:38:50 +0900 (JST)
From:	HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com>
To:	wency@...fujitsu.com
Cc:	zhangyanfei@...fujitsu.com, dzickus@...hat.com, luto@....edu,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, joerg.roedel@....com, mtosatti@...hat.com,
	kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, ludwig.nussel@...e.de,
	avi@...hat.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM-INTEL: Add new module vmcsinfo-intel to
 fill VMCSINFO

From: Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM-INTEL: Add new module vmcsinfo-intel to fill VMCSINFO
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 16:25:23 +0800

> At 07/06/2012 04:04 PM, HATAYAMA Daisuke Wrote:
>> From: Yanfei Zhang <zhangyanfei@...fujitsu.com>
>> Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM-INTEL: Add new module vmcsinfo-intel to fill VMCSINFO
>> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 18:05:19 +0800
>> 
>>> Besides, this patch also exports vmcs revision identifier via
>>> /sys/devices/system/cpu/vmcs_id and offsets of fields via
>>> /sys/devices/system/cpu/vmcs/.
>>> Individual offsets are contained in subfiles named by the filed's
>>> encoding, e.g.: /sys/devices/cpu/vmcs/0800
>> 
>> According to the discussion starting from
>> 
>> http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1105.3/00749.html
> 
> IIRC, kvm can not work in such environment. The vcpu can run on
> different cpu. If the cpu's vmcs is different, I don't know what
> will happen. So do we need to support for such environment now?
> I think that if kvm can not work in such environment, we should
> not provide vmcs information for each physical cpu.
> 

I think so too. The design can be kept very simple if kvm doesn't
support such case, and it would be good news. Is it true?

Thanks.
HATAYAMA, Daisuke

--
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/