linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] KVM: MMU: check guest CR3 reserved bits based on its physical address width.

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, 25 Aug 2017 00:21:07 +0800
From:   Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rkrcmar@...hat.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
        xiaoguangrong@...cent.com, joro@...tes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] KVM: MMU: check guest CR3 reserved bits based on
 its physical address width.



On 8/25/2017 12:27 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 24/08/2017 17:38, Yu Zhang wrote:
>>>
>>> In practice, MAXPHYADDR will never be 59 even because the PKRU bits are
>>> at bits 59..62.
>> Thanks, Paolo.
>> I see. I had made an assumption that MAXPHYADDR shall not exceed the
>> physical one,
>> which is 52 I believe. But I'm not sure there's any place to check this.
>> Maybe we should make sure the vcpu->arch.maxphyaddr will not be greater
>> than the value of the host?
> That's a separate change anyway.  In any case, since currently the
> MAXPHYADDR is not validated, your change to rsvd_bits makes sense.

Thanks, Paolo.
As to this patch series, any change I need do?

BTW,  I have written a patch for kvm-unit-test access test, but the test 
failed.
Not sure if my patch is erroneous or due to a simulator error. I'll send 
out the
test patch after it works.:-)

Yu
> Paolo
>