linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: selftests: Assert that STI blocking isn't set after event injection

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]

Message-ID: <CALMp9eRrZ3vMbiJRLU3wrpGaVbBOuYh8QkxazZKxXvDrnxVkUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 09:29:00 -0800
From: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Doug Covelli <doug.covelli@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: selftests: Assert that STI blocking isn't set
 after event injection

On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 8:56 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Add an L1 (guest) assert to the nested exceptions test to verify that KVM
> doesn't put VMRUN in an STI shadow (AMD CPUs bleed the shadow into the
> guest's int_state if a #VMEXIT occurs before VMRUN fully completes).
>
> Add a similar assert to the VMX side as well, because why not.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>

Reviewed-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>