linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] KVM: x86: add vCPU ioctl for HLT exits disable capability

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: <DM6PR12MB3500BC3ADEB0AAD6D20AC1B6CA519@DM6PR12MB3500.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 11 Jan 2022 06:36:46 +0000
From:   Kechen Lu <kechenl@...dia.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
CC:     "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "wanpengli@...cent.com" <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        "vkuznets@...hat.com" <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        "mst@...hat.com" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Somdutta Roy <somduttar@...dia.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] KVM: x86: add vCPU ioctl for HLT exits disable
 capability



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:01 PM
> To: Kechen Lu <kechenl@...dia.com>
> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org; pbonzini@...hat.com; wanpengli@...cent.com;
> vkuznets@...hat.com; mst@...hat.com; Somdutta Roy
> <somduttar@...dia.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] KVM: x86: add vCPU ioctl for HLT exits
> disable capability
> 
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Does your use case require toggling intercepts?  Or is the configuration
> static?
> > If it's static, then the easiest thing would be to follow the per-VM
> > behavior so that there are no suprises.  If toggling is required, then
> > I think the best thing would be to add a prep patch to add an override
> > flag to the per-VM ioctl, and then share code between the per-VM and
> > per-vCPU paths for modifying the flags (attached as patch 0003).
> 
> ...
> 
> > If toggling is not required, then I still think it makes sense to add
> > a macro to handle propagating the capability args to the arch flags.
> 
> Almost forgot.  Can you please add a selftests to verify whatever per-VM and
> per-vCPU behavior we end implementing?  Thanks!

Sure, will add selftests for per-VM and per-vCPU disable exits cap.

Thanks,
Kechen