linux-kernel - RE: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 3/3] X86, mpx: Intel MPX xstate feature definition

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:	Sat, 7 Dec 2013 01:16:33 +0000
From:	"Ren, Qiaowei" <qiaowei.ren@...el.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@...el.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
CC:	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@...el.com>,
	"qemu-devel@...gnu.org" <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: RE: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 3/3] X86,	mpx: Intel MPX xstate feature
 definition



> -----Original Message-----
> From: H. Peter Anvin [mailto:hpa@...or.com]
> Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 9:07 AM
> To: Ren, Qiaowei; Liu, Jinsong; Paolo Bonzini
> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org; x86@...nel.org; Xudong Hao;
> qemu-devel@...gnu.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Ingo Molnar; Thomas
> Gleixner
> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 3/3] X86, mpx: Intel MPX xstate feature
> definition
> 
> On 12/06/2013 04:23 PM, Ren, Qiaowei wrote:
> >>>
> >>> We need to either disable these features in lazy mode, or we need to
> >>> force eager mode if these features are to be supported.  The problem
> >>> with the latter is that it means forcing eager mode regardless of if
> >>> anything actually *uses* these features.
> >>>
> >>> A third option would be to require applications to use a prctl() or
> >>> similar to enable eager-save features.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The third option seems better -- how does native mpx patches work,
> >> force eager?
> >>
> > It should be the second option, as you can see xsave.c which we remove
> > from this patch. :)
> >
> 
> Ah yes... I missed the fact that that chunk had been dropped from this patch.
> It really shouldn't be.
> 
> I'll substitute the previous version of the patch.
> 
Jinsong think that both kvm and host depend on these feature definition header file, so we firstly submit these files depended on.

Thanks,
Qiaowei