linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 04/16] x86/xen: hypercall support for xenhost_t

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Message-ID: <fbfc0a0c-3707-7f17-9f2a-6c9d2c7b05b1@oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 Jun 2019 00:20:28 -0700
From:   Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
To:     Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Cc:     jgross@...e.com, sstabellini@...nel.org, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
        joao.m.martins@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 04/16] x86/xen: hypercall support for
 xenhost_t

On 2019-06-12 2:15 p.m., Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 09/05/2019 18:25, Ankur Arora wrote:
>> Allow for different hypercall implementations for different xenhost types.
>> Nested xenhost, which has two underlying xenhosts, can use both
>> simultaneously.
>>
>> The hypercall macros (HYPERVISOR_*) implicitly use the default xenhost.x
>> A new macro (hypervisor_*) takes xenhost_t * as a parameter and does the
>> right thing.
>>
>> TODO:
>>    - Multicalls for now assume the default xenhost
>>    - xen_hypercall_* symbols are only generated for the default xenhost.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
> 
> Again, what is the hypervisor nesting and/or guest layout here?
Two hypervisors, L0 and L1, and the guest is a child of the L1
hypervisor but could have PV devices attached to both L0 and L1
hypervisors.

> 
> I can't think of any case where a single piece of software can
> legitimately have two hypercall pages, because if it has one working
> one, it is by definition a guest, and therefore not privileged enough to
> use the outer one.
Depending on which hypercall page is used, the hypercall would
(eventually) land in the corresponding hypervisor.

Juergen elsewhere pointed out proxying hypercalls is a better approach,
so I'm not really considering this any more but, given this layout, and
assuming that the hypercall pages could be encoded differently would it
still not work?

Ankur

> 
> ~Andrew
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
> https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
> 

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