linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: don't expose syscall/sysret to intel 32-bit guest

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 19 Nov 2015 13:02:40 +0100
From:	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:	Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
Cc:	Wanpeng li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: don't expose syscall/sysret to intel 32-bit
 guest



On 19/11/2015 13:01, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> > This is not correct.  As far as I know, the SYSCALL bit is always
> > present in CPUID, even if the machine is running in 32-bit mode; CPUID
> > documentation (SDM Volume 2) explicitly documents bit 11 as "Bit 11:
> > SYSCALL/SYSRET available in 64-bit mode".
> 
> No, I try a 32-bit linux host kernel, cpuid tool shows that SYSCALL
> bit is not set.

Ok, let me try...

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/