linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: nVMX: Emulate EPTP switching for the L1 hypervisor

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:   Tue, 11 Jul 2017 10:39:17 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Bandan Das <bsd@...hat.com>,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: nVMX: Emulate EPTP switching for the L1
 hypervisor

On 11/07/2017 09:51, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> +static inline bool nested_cpu_has_eptp_switching(struct vmcs12 *vmcs12)
>> +{
>> +	return nested_cpu_has_vmfunc(vmcs12) &&
>> +		(vmcs12->vm_function_control &
>
> I wonder if it makes sense to rename vm_function_control to
> - vmfunc_control
> - vmfunc_controls (so it matches nested_vmx_vmfunc_controls)
> - vmfunc_ctrl

Blame Intel for this. :) They use full English names for VMCS fields (so
"VM-function control") and uppercase names for MSRs (so "IA32_VMX_VMFUNC").

"nested_vmx_vmfunc_controls" could be renamed to "nested_vmx_vmfunc" for
consistency, but I like the longer name too.

Paolo