linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 09/19] KVM:x86: Make guest supervisor states as non-XSAVE managed

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]

Date:   Fri, 4 Aug 2023 22:59:54 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Weijiang Yang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>,
        Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        john.allen@....com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com,
        binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/19] KVM:x86: Make guest supervisor states as
 non-XSAVE managed

On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 01:45:11PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:

> So unless I'm missing something, NAK to this approach, at least not without trying
> the kernel FPU approach, i.e. I want somelike like to PeterZ or tglx to actually
> full on NAK the kernel approach before we consider shoving a hack into KVM.

Not having fully followed things (I'll go read up), SSS is blocked on
FRED. But it is definitely on the books to do SSS once FRED is go.

So if the approach as chosen gets in the way of host kernel SS
management, that is a wee problem.