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  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:   Wed, 8 Aug 2018 14:47:33 +0200
From:   Cornelia Huck <>
To:     David Hildenbrand <>
        Heiko Carstens <>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <>,
        Janosch Frank <>,
        Christian Borntraeger <>,
        Pierre Morel <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] KVM: s390: introduce and use

On Tue,  7 Aug 2018 14:51:31 +0200
David Hildenbrand <> wrote:

> When we change the crycb (or execution controls), we also have to make sure
> that the vSIE shadow datastructures properly consider the changed
> values before rerunning the vSIE. We can achieve that by simply using a
> VCPU request now.

Is this actually a concrete problem right now, or does this only become
a real concern with vfio-ap?

> This has to be a synchronous request (== handled before entering the
> (v)SIE again).
> The request will make sure that the vSIE handler is left, and that the
> request will be processed (NOP), therefore forcing a reload of all
> vSIE data (including rebuilding the crycb) when re-entering the vSIE
> interception handler the next time.
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <>
> ---
>  arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
>  arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 7 ++++++-
>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists