linux-kernel - Re: [announce] [patch] KVM paravirtualization for Linux

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]

Message-ID: <20070108094359.GB30482@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 8 Jan 2007 10:43:59 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
Cc:	kvm-devel <kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] KVM paravirtualization for Linux

* Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com> wrote:

> Looks like a lot of complexity for very little gain.  I'm not sure 
> what the vmwrite cost is, cut it can't be that high compared to 
> vmexit.

while i disagree with characterising one extra parameter passed down 
plus one extra branch as 'a lot of complexity', i agree that making the 
flush a NOP on VMX is even better. (if it's possible without breaking 
future hardware) I guess you are right that the only true cost here is 
the vmwrite cost, and that there's no impact on CR3 flushing (because it 
happens unconditionally). Forget about this patch.

	Ingo
-
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/