[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140822162907.3d769e2b@mantra.us.oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 16:29:07 -0700
From: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@...cle.com>
To: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@...cle.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, david.vrabel@...rix.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [V0 PATCH 1/2] AMD-PVH: set EFER.NX and EFER.SCE
for the boot vcpu
On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 12:09:27 -0700
Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@...cle.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 06:41:40 +0200
> Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 07:46:56PM -0700, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> > > Intel doesn't have EFER.NX bit.
> >
> > Of course it does.
> >
>
> Right, it does. Some code/comment is misleading... Anyways, reading
> intel SDMs, if I understand the convoluted text correctly, EFER.NX is
> not required to be set for l1.nx to be set, thus allowing for page
> level protection. Where as on AMD, EFER.NX must be set for l1.nx to
> be used. So, in the end, this patch would apply to both amd/intel....
>
> I'll reword and submit.
Err, try again, the section "4.1.1 Three Paging Modes" says:
"Execute-disable access rights are applied only if IA32_EFER.NXE = 1"
So, I guess NX is broken on Intel PVH because EFER.NX is currently
not being set. While AMD will #GP if l1.NX is set and EFER.NX is not,
I guess Intel just ignores the l1.XD if EFER.NX is not set.
Mukesh
--
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