linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] MTE support for KVM guest

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: <CAJc+Z1E0rdWcDD1N1R=d-v8FnWSWw=Yu7qypUjRFG_pXw1xybQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 17 Dec 2020 09:47:10 +0800
From:   Haibo Xu <haibo.xu@...aro.org>
To:     Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Juan Quintela <quintela@...hat.com>,
        Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@...aro.org>,
        QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
        "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
        arm-mail-list <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        kvmarm <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
        lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] MTE support for KVM guest

On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 18:23, Steven Price <steven.price@....com> wrote:
>
> On 16/12/2020 07:31, Haibo Xu wrote:
> [...]
> > Hi Steve,
>
> Hi Haibo
>
> > I have finished verifying the POC on a FVP setup, and the MTE test case can
> > be migrated from one VM to another successfully. Since the test case is very
> > simple which just maps one page with MTE enabled and does some memory
> > access, so I can't say it's OK for other cases.
>
> That's great progress.
>
> >
> > BTW, I noticed that you have sent out patch set v6 which mentions that mapping
> > all the guest memory with PROT_MTE was not feasible. So what's the plan for the
> > next step? Will new KVM APIs which can facilitate the tag store and recover be
> > available?
>
> I'm currently rebasing on top of the KASAN MTE patch series. My plan for
> now is to switch back to not requiring the VMM to supply PROT_MTE (so
> KVM 'upgrades' the pages as necessary) and I'll add an RFC patch on the
> end of the series to add an KVM API for doing bulk read/write of tags.
> That way the VMM can map guest memory without PROT_MTE (so device 'DMA'
> accesses will be unchecked), and use the new API for migration.
>

Great! Will have a try with the new API in my POC!

> Thanks,
>
> Steve