linux-kernel - Re: [KVM PATCH v9 2/2] KVM: add iosignalfd support

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, 7 Jul 2009 15:22:50 +0300
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v9 2/2] KVM: add iosignalfd support

On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 02:53:18PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> +		/* address-range must be precise for a hit */
>>>      
>>
>> So there's apparently no way to specify that
>> you want 1,2, or 4 byte writes at address X?
>>    
>
> Why would you want that?

Donnu. Why would anyone want to catch 8 byte writes at all?
Seriously, why add artificial limitations?
IMO, addr=0,len=1 and addr=0,len=2 should not conflict.

-- 
MST
--
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/