linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/61] KVM: x86: Refactor loop around do_cpuid

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: <c4cb8b15-acab-38a7-a2c2-74b58f7df873@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:35:10 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc:     Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/61] KVM: x86: Refactor loop around do_cpuid_func() to
 separate helper

On 25/02/20 16:09, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Apart from the stupidity of the above case, why would it be EINVAL?
>>
> I suggested -EINVAL because issuing KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID with nent=0
> looks more like a completely invalid input and not 'too many
> entries'(-E2BIG) to me (but -E2BIG is already there, let's keep it, it's
> not a big deal).

Yes, and in fact he already does that change a few patches later.

Paolo