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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 26 Jun 2014 12:37:29 +0200
From:	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>
To:	Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
CC:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Prepare for in-kernel VFIO DMA operations acceleration


On 26.06.14 01:59, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/26/2014 07:12 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 06.06.14 02:20, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> On 06/05/2014 09:57 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> On 05.06.14 09:25, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>> This reserves 2 capability numbers.
>>>>>
>>>>> This implements an extended version of KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_64 ioctl.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please advise how to proceed with these patches as I suspect that
>>>>> first two should go via Paolo's tree while the last one via Alex Graf's
>>>>> tree
>>>>> (correct?).
>>>> They would just go via my tree, but only be actually allocated (read:
>>>> mergable to qemu) when they hit Paolo's tree.
>>>>
>>>> In fact, I don't think it makes sense to split them off at all.
>>> So? Are these patches going anywhere? Thanks.
>> So? Are you going to address the comments?
> Sorry, I cannot find here anything to fix. Ben asked some questions, I
> answered and there were no objections. What do I miss this time?...

> >> In fact, the code as is today can allocate an arbitrary amount of pinned
> >> kernel memory from within user space without any checks.
> >
> > Right. We should at least account it in the locked limit.
>
> Yup. And (probably) this thing will keep a counter of how many windows were
> created per KVM instance to avoid having multiple copies of the same table.


Alex

--
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