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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:31:48 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> To: "Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@...el.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org> Cc: "alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>, "srutherford@...el.com" <srutherford@...el.com>, "Gudimetla, Giridhar Kumar" <giridhar.kumar.gudimetla@...el.com>, "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86: set TMR when the interrupt is accepted On 13/08/2015 08:35, Zhang, Yang Z wrote: >> You may be right. It is safe if no future hardware plans to use >> it. Let me check with our hardware team to see whether it will be >> used or not in future. > > After checking with Jun, there is no guarantee that the guest running > on another CPU will operate properly if hypervisor modify the vTMR > from another CPU. So the hypervisor should not to do it. I guess I can cause a vmexit on level-triggered interrupts, it's not a big deal, but no weasel words, please. What's going to break, and where is it documented? Paolo -- 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