linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 02/16] KVM: selftests: add hooks for managing encrypted guest memory

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <775667ae-3e82-bba1-d1af-e11d04ddb03d@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Oct 2021 17:22:47 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Michael Roth <michael.roth@....com>,
        Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>
Cc:     linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Nathan Tempelman <natet@...gle.com>,
        Marc Orr <marcorr@...gle.com>,
        Steve Rutherford <srutherford@...gle.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Varad Gautam <varad.gautam@...e.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@...gle.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 02/16] KVM: selftests: add hooks for managing encrypted
 guest memory

On 21/10/21 05:37, Michael Roth wrote:
>> Do we have to make a copy for the sparsebit? Why not just return the
>> pointer? By looking at your subsequent patches, I find that this data
>> structure seems to be just read-only?
> Yes, it's only intended to be used for read access. But I'll if I can
> enforce that without the need to use a copy.
> 

Return it as a const pointer?

Paolo