linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 39/61] KVM: SVM: Convert feature updates from CPUID to KVM cpu caps

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <052d2bdf-d2da-36c0-2fb5-563b5bf5f2ed@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Feb 2020 08:03:33 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        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 39/61] KVM: SVM: Convert feature updates from CPUID to KVM
 cpu caps

On 28/02/20 01:36, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Regarding NRIPS, the original commit added the "Support next_rip if host
> supports it" comment, but I can't tell is "host supports" means "supported
> in hardware" or "supported by KVM".  In other words, should I make the cap
> dependent "nrips" or leave it as is?
> 

The "nrips" parameter came later.  For VMX we generally remove guest
capabilities if the corresponding parameter is on, so it's a good idea
to do the same for SVM.

Paolo