| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4CE1038D.9020403@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 17:55:25 +0800 From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com> To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com> CC: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] KVM: MMU: retry #PF for softmmu On 11/15/2010 05:30 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: >> Yeah, this 'retry' is unnecessary if the process is killed, but this >> case is infrequent, the most case is the process keeps running and try >> to access the fault address later. > > The problem is that if we retry in this case, we install an incorrect spte? > ...... >> can avoid if the page mapping have been fixed. > > The guest may have changed page directories or other levels. > ...... >> > Or another thread may have mmap()ed something else over the >> > same address. >> >> The mmap virtual address is also visible for other threads since the >> threads >> have the same page table, so i think this case is the same as above? > > Again, don't we install the wrong spte in this case? > I think it doesn't corrupts spte since we will walk guest page table again and map it to shadow pages when we retry #PF. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists