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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 5 Oct 2021 12:46:34 +0200
From:   Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, markver@...ibm.com,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        qemu-devel@...gnu.org, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        Xie Yongji <xieyongji@...edance.com>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] virtio: write back features before verify

On Tue, 5 Oct 2021 03:53:17 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> wrote:

> > Wouldn't a call from transport code into virtio core
> > be more handy? What I have in mind is stuff like vhost-user and vdpa. My
> > understanding is, that for vhost setups where the config is outside qemu,
> > we probably need a new  command that tells the vhost backend what
> > endiannes to use for config. I don't think we can use
> > VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENDIAN because  that one is on a virtqueue basis
> > according to the doc. So for vhost-user and similar we would fire that
> > command and probably also set the filed, while for devices for which
> > control plane is handled by QEMU we would just set the field.
> > 
> > Does that sound about right?  
> 
> I'm fine either way, but when would you invoke this?
> With my idea backends can check the field when get_config
> is invoked.
> 
> As for using this in VHOST, can we maybe re-use SET_FEATURES?
> 
> Kind of hacky but nice in that it will actually make existing backends
> work...

Basically the equivalent of this patch, just on the vhost interface,
right? Could work I have to look into it :)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists