linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "KVM: Check the allocation of pv cpu mask"

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAB5KdObJ4_0oJf+rwGXWNk6MsKm1j0dqrcGQkzQ63ek1LY=zMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:25:08 +0800
From:   Haiwei Li <lihaiwei.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@...cent.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "KVM: Check the allocation of pv cpu mask"

Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com> 于2020年9月16日周三 下午7:04写道：
>
> Haiwei Li <lihaiwei.kernel@...il.com> writes:
>
> > On 20/9/16 17:03, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> >> The commit 0f990222108d ("KVM: Check the allocation of pv cpu mask") we
> >> have in 5.9-rc5 has two issue:
> >> 1) Compilation fails for !CONFIG_SMP, see:
> >>     https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209285
> >>
> >> 2) This commit completely disables PV TLB flush, see
> >>     https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/87y2lrnnyf.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com/
> >>
> >> The allocation problem is likely a theoretical one, if we don't
> >> have memory that early in boot process we're likely doomed anyway.
> >> Let's solve it properly later.
> >
> > Hi, i have sent a patchset to fix this commit.
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20200914091148.95654-1-lihaiwei.kernel@gmail.com/T/#m6c27184012ee5438e5d91c09b1ba1b6a3ee30ee4
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> Saw it, looks good to me. We are, however, already very, very late in 5.9
> release cycle and the original issue you were addressing (allocation
> failure) is likely a theoretical only I suggest we just revert it before
> 5.9 is released. For 5.9 we can certainly take your PATCH2 merged with
> 0f99022210.
>
> This Paolo's call anyway)

I see.  Thank you.

Haiwei Li