linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] KVM: MMU: retry #PF for softmmu

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4CE1079E.6040209@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Mon, 15 Nov 2010 18:12:46 +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 05:59 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 11/15/2010 11:55 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> >>  >   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.
> 
> Well, you're right, we don't use any gfn/pfn info from the async page
> fault.
> 
> However, we're still not modelling the cpu accurately.  For example we
> will set dirty and accessed bits, or inject a page fault if the gpte
> turns out to be not present.
> 

Yes, i missed this, will cook it. Thanks.
--
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/