linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND v4 5/9] KVM: VMX: Add init/set/get functions for SPP

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: <CALMp9eTGXDDfVspFwFyEhagg9sdnqZqzSQhDksT0bkKzVNGSqw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:25:41 -0700
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To:     Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        yu.c.zhang@...el.com, alazar@...defender.com,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v4 5/9] KVM: VMX: Add init/set/get functions for SPP

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 6:41 AM Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@...el.com> wrote:

> Hi, Vitaly,
> After looked into the issue and others, I feel to make SPP co-existing
> with nested VM is not good, the major reason is, L1 pages protected by
> SPP are transparent to L1 VM, if it launches L2 VM, probably the
> pages would be allocated to L2 VM, and that will bother to L1 and L2.
> Given the feature is new and I don't see nested VM can benefit
> from it right now, I would like to make SPP and nested feature mutually
> exclusive, i.e., detecting if the other part is active before activate one
> feature,what do you think of it?
> thanks!

How do you propose making the features mutually exclusive?