linux-kernel - Re: KVM timekeeping fixes, V2

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: <4C4094E0.7000403@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Jul 2010 07:20:32 -1000
From:	Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>
To:	Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
CC:	KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com>,
	Linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: KVM timekeeping fixes, V2

On 07/16/2010 03:19 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 04:25:20PM -1000, Zachary Amsden wrote:
>    
>> Discovered brammage in patches due to unresolved merge.
>> Also, had to move 09/18 past 08/18 to resolve compile issue.
>>      
> Have you tested this patchset with Nested SVM? We had TSC handling
> related bugs there in the past and should make sure to keep it working.
>    

I've been very careful to keep nested SVM safe, but I've not got a good 
test for that.  Is there any test suite for the nested case?

It took a lot of guessing to figure out why it works and why the code 
looks imbalanced, but I now understand the way it is now is logical and 
correct.
--
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/