linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] KVM: nVMX: Handle dynamic MSR intercept toggling

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: <YFJg4vBj+/34SVgg@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:04:50 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.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, Alexander Graf <graf@...zon.com>,
        Yuan Yao <yaoyuan0329os@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] KVM: nVMX: Handle dynamic MSR intercept toggling

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 17/03/21 17:50, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > Feel free to squash patch 3 in this one or reorder it before; it makes sense
> > > > to make them macros when you go from 4 to 6 functions.
> > > I put them in a separate patch so that backporting the fix for the older FS/GS
> > > nVMX bug was at least feasible.  Not worth it?
> > 
> > Going all the way back to 5.2 would almost certainly have other conflicts,
> > so probably not.
> 
> I'll do a dry run before posting v2; if it's clean I'll leave things as is, if
> it's a mess I'll move the macro patch earlier.

Backports to 5.4 (the olds relevant LTS) with a single trivial conflict on a
function prototype (the function itself isn't touched, it's just an unfortunate
false postive), and the MSR filtering selftest runs cleanly (in L1).  I'll keep
the original ordering unless you strongly prefer moving the macro patch earlier.