linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] Documentation: KVM: add API issues section

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]

Date:   Thu, 24 Mar 2022 01:15:39 +0000
From:   Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        mlevitsk@...hat.com, jmattson@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Documentation: KVM: add API issues section

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:32:50PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 3/23/22 19:16, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > Do you think we should vent about our mistakes inline with the
> > descriptions of the corresponding UAPI? One example that comes to mind
> > is ARM's CNTV_CVAL_EL0/CNTVCT_EL0 mixup, which is mentioned in 4.68
> > 'KVM_SET_ONE_REG'. That, of course, doesn't cover the
> > previously-undocumented bits of UAPI that are problematic:)
> 
> It depends.  My intention was to use this document more for hidden
> interdependencies, in this case between KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID and
> KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP, KVM_ENABLE_CAP(KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP_SPLIT),
> KVM_CAP_TSC_DEADLINE_TIMER.

Ah good point. I agree bad cross interactions need to be called out
separately.

Thanks!

--
Oliver