linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/9] KVM: MMU: fask check write-protect for direct mmu

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: <20120720003917.GA8951@amt.cnet>
Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2012 21:39:17 -0300
From:	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
To:	Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] KVM: MMU: fask check write-protect for direct mmu

On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 09:53:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> If it have no indirect shadow pages we need not protect any gfn,
> this is always true for direct mmu without nested
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

Xiao,

What is the motivation? Numbers please.

In fact, what case was the original indirect_shadow_pages conditional in
kvm_mmu_pte_write optimizing again?


--
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/