linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/kvm/vmx: read MSR_FS

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:   Tue, 13 Mar 2018 14:24:58 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/kvm/vmx: read MSR_FS_BASE from current->thread

On 13/03/2018 14:20, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> vmcs_writel() I guess ... and, just to make sure I follow your
> suggestion, this is for x86_64 only, right? x86_32 does
> 
> vmcs_writel(HOST_FS_BASE, segment_base(vmx->host_state.fs_sel));
> 
> and I think it needs to stay.

Yes.

> (personally, I'm rather for exporting save_fsgs(), dropping
> savesegment() and getting all we need from current to avoid propagating
> assumptions but I'm flexible)

Yes, that's fine too, as long as it's not mix and match. :)

Paolo