linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 08/25] KVM: VMX: Initialize VMCS FRED fields

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: <SA1PR11MB67343F4567F769E3262A27F9A80D2@SA1PR11MB6734.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:02:59 +0000
From: "Li, Xin3" <xin3.li@...el.com>
To: "Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
	"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "corbet@....net"
	<corbet@....net>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
	"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "x86@...nel.org"
	<x86@...nel.org>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "shuah@...nel.org"
	<shuah@...nel.org>, "vkuznets@...hat.com" <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
	"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>, "Shankar, Ravi V"
	<ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>, "xin@...or.com" <xin@...or.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 08/25] KVM: VMX: Initialize VMCS FRED fields

> >+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> 
> is this #ifdeffery neccesary?

Yes, otherwise build fails on 32 bit.

> 
> I assume kvm_cpu_cap_has(X86_FEATURE_FRED) is always false
> for !CONFIG_X86_64.
> Looks most of FRED changes in core kernel don't have such #ifdeffery.

Because it's not a compile time false, instead false from runtime.

> 
> >+		/* Per-CPU FRED MSRs */
> 
> Please explain why these six MSRs are updated here and why only they are updated in
> this comment.

The explanation is kind of implicit "per-CPU", I will make it more explicit	

Thanks!
    Xin