linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] KVM: nSVM: Do not track EFER.SVME toggling in guest mode

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: <aYP8HGQrj2aW6NGJ@google.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 18:10:36 -0800
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] KVM: nSVM: Do not track EFER.SVME toggling in guest mode

On Wed, Feb 04, 2026, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 01:15:45PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > All that said, I agree that pulling the rug out from under the VM is a terrible
> > experience.  What if we throw a triple fault at the vCPU so that L1 gets an
> > immediate SHUTDOWN (not a VM-Exit, a SHUTDOWN of the L1 vCPU), instead of running
> > random garbage from L2?
> 
> I am fine with this too, anything is better than pulling the rug. I will
> send a v2 and probably drop patch 1 (unless you prefer that we keep it).

Drop it, otherwise we'll probably end up wasting several days bikeshedding the
name.