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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 4 Feb 2016 17:28:00 -0500
From:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
Cc:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	roger.pau@...rix.com, x86@...nel.org, GLin@...e.coma,
	bblanco@...mgrid.com, pmonclus@...mgrid.com, bp@...e.de,
	hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/11] xen/hvmlite: Bootstrap HVMlite guest

On 02/04/2016 03:57 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>
> Ah, well here lies the issue. As per hpa subarch was not designed for defining
> a hypervisor, but rather at least subarch PC (0) [should be used if the
> hardware is] "enumerable using standard PC mechanisms (PCI, ACPI) and doesn't
> need a special boot flow". Does that follow the definition of HVMlite?

Yes. HVMlite is going to use baremetal boot flow.

> OK great. That still means the code will run, and if we can avoid that
> why not. I am fine with annotating this as future work to help. Let me
> then ask as well, how about the rest of the code during and after
> startup_32() and startup_64() -- are we sure that's all safe ?

I can't be sure, all I can say is that so far I haven't seen any problems.

-boris


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ