linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] KVM: x86: make several AVIC callbacks optional

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: <65871234-0c94-2455-c55f-6c1d5775e485@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:41:27 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] KVM: x86: make several AVIC callbacks optional

On 2/18/22 18:37, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> True, on the other hand there's no reason why a hypothetical third vendor
>> would have to support it.  The call is conditional to apicv_active being
>> true.
> Ah, right, even if the the static_call_cond() is unnecessary because we want to
> make the hook mandatory if APICv is supported, APICv itself may not be supported.

I'm not even sure we want to make it mandatory, in fact.

Also new full log:

----
All their invocations are conditional on vcpu->arch.apicv_active,
meaning that they need not be implemented by vendor code: even
though at the moment both vendors implement APIC virtualization,
all of them should be optional.  In fact SVM does not need many of
them, and their implementation can be deleted now.
----

Paolo