linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] KVM: X86: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20171116160613.GY21113@char.us.oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Nov 2017 11:06:13 -0500
From:   Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] KVM: X86: Add paravirt remote TLB flush

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 12:00:45PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 15/11/2017 22:11, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > If we migrate to another host that does not expose this, should the
> > flush_tlb_others be reset back to the generic one? Or we don't care that
> > much ?
> 
> Migration to a host that does not expose the feature would be a
> configuration error.

Right, so should there be an check somewhere to disallow this <lots of hand waving>?
Or at least print out a "Hey, this is not a good idea!"

> 
> Paolo