linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: nVMX: Decouple EPT RWX bits from EPT Violation protection bits

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: <73f00589-7d6d-489a-ae40-fefdf674ea42@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 08:52:46 +0200
From: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: nVMX: Decouple EPT RWX bits from EPT
 Violation protection bits



On 27.02.25 г. 2:07 ч., Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Define independent macros for the RWX protection bits that are enumerated
> via EXIT_QUALIFICATION for EPT Violations, and tie them to the RWX bits in
> EPT entries via compile-time asserts.  Piggybacking the EPTE defines works
> for now, but it creates holes in the EPT_VIOLATION_xxx macros and will
> cause headaches if/when KVM emulates Mode-Based Execution (MBEC), or any
> other features that introduces additional protection information.
> 
> Opportunistically rename EPT_VIOLATION_RWX_MASK to EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_MASK
> so that it doesn't become stale if/when MBEC support is added.
> 
> No functional change intended.
> 
> Cc: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
> Cc: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>

Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>