linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xen: remove XEN_PRIVILEGED

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: <1392642197.13000.20.camel@x220>
Date:	Mon, 17 Feb 2014 14:03:17 +0100
From:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc:	x86@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@...e-electrons.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: remove XEN_PRIVILEGED_GUEST

On Mon, 2014-02-17 at 07:23 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2014 3:07 PM, Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl> wrote:
> Please look in the grub git tree. They have fixed their code to not do
> this anymore. This should be reflected in the patch description.

Thanks, I didn't know that. That turned out to be grub commit
ec824e0f2a399ce2ab3a2e3353d372a236595059 ("Implement grub_file tool and
use it to implement generating of config"), see
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git/commit/util/grub.d/20_linux_xen.in?id=ec824e0f2a399ce2ab3a2e3353d372a236595059

> Lastly please check which distro has this new grub version so that we
> know which distros won't be affected.

No distro should be affected. See, the test that grub2 used to do was
(edited for clarity):
    grep -qx "CONFIG_XEN_DOM0=y" "${config}" || grep -qx "CONFIG_XEN_PRIVILEGED_GUEST=y" "${config}"

But the Kconfig entry for XEN_PRIVILEGED_GUEST reads:
    config XEN_PRIVILEGED_GUEST
            def_bool XEN_DOM0

Ie, XEN_PRIVILEGED_GUEST is equal to XEN_DOM0 by definition, so the
second part of that test is superfluous. (We discussed this last year.
If lkml.org weren't down I'd provide a link.) Or am I misreading this
Kconfig entry?

I hope to send a v2, with an updated commit explanation, in a few days.


Paul Bolle

--
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/