linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Kick VCPU outside PIC lock again

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4B84FDF5.5080106@siemens.com>
Date:	Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:22:45 +0100
From:	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
	RT <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Kick VCPU outside PIC lock again

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/24/2010 12:13 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>    
>>> I see.  Won't we hit the same issue when we call pic functions from
>>> atomic context during the guest entry sequence?
>>>
>>>      
>> If there are such call paths, for sure. What concrete path(s) do you
>> have in mind?
>>
>>    
> 
> vcpu_enter_guest() -> inject_pending_event() -> 
> kvm_cpu_{has,get}_interrupt() -> various pic functions if you're unlucky.

But do they kick anyone or just check/pull information? Never saw any
warnings during my tests last year (granted: with older -rt and kvm
versions).

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
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/