linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 04/12] xen/hvmlite: Bootstrap HVMlite 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]

Message-ID: <E0EC0392-0AAA-482D-A0C3-01AA1C8EDB11@oracle.com>
Date:	Sat, 23 Jan 2016 11:12:23 -0500
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>,
	Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@...rix.com>
CC:	Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 04/12] xen/hvmlite: Bootstrap HVMlite	guest

On January 23, 2016 11:01:06 AM EST, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>On January 23, 2016 7:34:33 AM PST, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
><konrad.wilk@...cle.com> wrote:
>>
>>>However, this stub belongs in Linux, not in the Xen toolstack.  That
>>>way, when the Linux boot protocol is modified, both sides can be
>>>updated
>>>accordingly.
>>
>>I would add that this idea is borrowed from the EFI stub code that
>>Linux has which also constructs the boot parameter structure when
>>invoked (either from firmware or from EFI shell).
>
>There is a huge difference though: EFI is a widely used multivendor
>industry standard.  You are taking about something Xen-specific, and
>which in good Xen tradition isn't even documented, apparently (did we
>ever get documentation for the hypervisor ABI?)
>
>Asking "why burden Xen with something Linux-specific" is a pretty
>extreme case of the tail wagging the dog.
>
>That being said, before any code can be put anywhere, it needs to be
>written.  We can argue where to put it later.  We went through this
>process with the EFI stub, too: a standalone implementation (efilinux)
>first.

http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2015-12/msg01793.html

I believe is the latest version. Roger (CCed) has probably an updated one.