linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] KVM: SVM: ignore type when setting segment registers

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJX1Yta08Gr_N9BYuKfiaBkQe9yb1qT+wBjtjaN4fucKCzKLWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 31 May 2017 08:42:08 +0200
From:   Gi-Oh Kim <gi-oh.kim@...fitbricks.com>
To:     Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@...fitbricks.com>, andre.przywara@....com,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] KVM: SVM: ignore type when setting segment registers

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Matt Mullins <mmullins@...x.us> wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 02:54:21PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> 2017-05-29 15:24+0200, Gioh Kim:
>> > If so, why type is checked when setting segment registers?
>>
>> No idea.  19bca6ab75d8 ("KVM: SVM: Fix cross vendor migration issue with
>> unusable bit") also moved the assigment up to initialize it before use
>> and I think that is enough.
>
> Was this perhaps intended to instead check for a zero selector, which is also
> an unusable segment?

I think that is what present value is for.


-- 
Best regards,
Gi-Oh Kim
TEL: 0176 2697 8962