linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 0/9] Linear Address Masking (LAM) KVM Enabling

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <6e990b88-1e28-9563-2c2f-0d5d52f9c7ca@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 17 Aug 2023 17:17:25 +0800
From:   Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, chao.gao@...el.com, kai.huang@...el.com,
        David.Laight@...lab.com, robert.hu@...ux.intel.com,
        guang.zeng@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/9] Linear Address Masking (LAM) KVM Enabling



On 8/17/2023 6:25 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023, Binbin Wu wrote:
>> Binbin Wu (7):
>>    KVM: x86/mmu: Use GENMASK_ULL() to define __PT_BASE_ADDR_MASK
>>    KVM: x86: Add & use kvm_vcpu_is_legal_cr3() to check CR3's legality
>>    KVM: x86: Use KVM-governed feature framework to track "LAM enabled"
>>    KVM: x86: Virtualize CR3.LAM_{U48,U57}
>>    KVM: x86: Introduce get_untagged_addr() in kvm_x86_ops and call it in
>>      emulator
>>    KVM: VMX: Implement and wire get_untagged_addr() for LAM
>>    KVM: x86: Untag address for vmexit handlers when LAM applicable
>>
>> Robert Hoo (2):
>>    KVM: x86: Virtualize CR4.LAM_SUP
>>    KVM: x86: Expose LAM feature to userspace VMM
> Looks good, just needs a bit of re-organination.  Same goes for the LASS series.
>
> For the next version, can you (or Zeng) send a single series for LAM and LASS?
> They're both pretty much ready to go, i.e. I don't expect one to hold up the other
> at this point, and posting a single series will reduce the probability of me
> screwing up a conflict resolution or missing a dependency when applying.
>
> Lastly, a question: is there a pressing need to get LAM/LASS support merged _now_?
> E.g. are there are there any publicly available CPUs that support LAM and/or LASS?
AFAIK, there is no publicly available CPU supporting LAM and LASS yet.

>
> If not, I'll wait until v6.7 to grab these, e.g. so that you don't have to rush
> madly to turn around the next version, and so that I'm not trying to squeeze too
> much stuff in just before the merge window.