linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 04/14] x86/rtc: replace paravirt rtc check with platform legacy quirk

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:	Fri, 8 Apr 2016 20:45:23 +0200
From:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Cc:	Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	lguest@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	Joey Lee <jlee@...e.com>, Gary Lin <glin@...e.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
	Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	kozerkov@...allels.com, Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/14] x86/rtc: replace paravirt rtc check with
 platform legacy quirk

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 08:37:44AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 04/08/2016 03:59 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> >On 08/04/16 09:36, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >>On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:13 AM, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com> wrote:
> >>>On 08/04/16 08:56, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >>>>On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>Okay. Another idea (not sure whether this is really a good one):
> >>>>
> >>>>Add X86_SUBARCH_XEN_DOM0. As hardware_subarch is 32 bits wide I don't
> >>>>think the number of subarchs is a scarce resource. :-)
> >>This would mean bumping the x86 boot protocol, we shouldn't take that
> >>lightly, but given that in this case the new subarch would really only
> >>be set by the kernel (or future loaders for perhaps HVMLite) I'd think
> >>this is not such an intrusive alternative.
> >I think adding an own subarch for dom0 isn't that bad. It really is
> >different from domU as dom0 has per default access to the real hardware
> >(or at least to most of it).
> 
> Can we do this (overwrite quirks) in x86_init_ops.arch_setup? I'd
> really like to avoid adding a what essentially is a sub-subarch.

I'm going with this. Will respin.

  Luis