linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 22/22] s390: doc: detailed specifications for AP virtualization

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]

Message-Id: <b80ae83f-0339-0eea-e12b-d5b21e6138fd@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Aug 2018 12:45:14 +0200
From:   Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Harald Freudenberger <freude@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
Cc:     Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, freude@...ibm.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com,
        kwankhede@...dia.com, bjsdjshi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
        pmorel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, alifm@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        mjrosato@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, jjherne@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        thuth@...hat.com, pasic@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, berrange@...hat.com,
        fiuczy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, buendgen@...ibm.com,
        frankja@...ux.ibm.com, Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 22/22] s390: doc: detailed specifications for AP
 virtualization



On 08/22/2018 12:13 PM, Harald Freudenberger wrote:
> ... about control domains
> 
> Talked with the s390 firmware guys. The convention that the control domain
> mask is a superset of the usage domain mask is only true for 1st level guests.
> 
> It is absolutely valid to run a kvm guest with restricted control domain
> mask bitmap in the CRYCB. It is valid to have an empty control domain mask
> and the guest should be able to run crypto CPRBs on the usage domain(s) without
> any problems. However, nobody has tried this.

I did try this ;).

> 
> regards
> Harald Freudenberger
> 
>