linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 3/3] paravirt: rename paravirt_enabled to paravirt

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]

Message-ID: <20160208171305.GN28980@pd.tnic>
Date:	Mon, 8 Feb 2016 18:13:05 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
Cc:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, david.e.box@...el.com,
	Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
	Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, qiuxishi@...wei.com,
	cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, Xen Devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, mcb30@...e.org,
	Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, long.wanglong@...wei.com,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 3/3] paravirt: rename paravirt_enabled to
 paravirt_legacy

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:53:00PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> As an alternative check which should be doable this early on, peeking in
> the head of hypercall_page should work.  If Linux was booted as a PV
> guest, the hypercall_page will have been constructed by the domain
> builder, and won't have 0x90's in it.

Good to know, we might need it for something. :)

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.