linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: Add a dedicated INVD intercept routine

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: <26425c1b-a56d-bb52-109a-ab92eeb2c084@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:06:31 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: Add a dedicated INVD intercept routine

On 24/09/20 15:58, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> does it sill make sense to intercept INVD when we just skip it? Would it
> rather make sense to disable INVD intercept for SEV guests completely?

If we don't intercept the processor would really invalidate the cache,
that is certainly not what we want.

Paolo