From: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: gleb@kernel.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Han,
Huaitong" <huaitong.han@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] KVM: MMU: fix permission_fault()
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 14:39:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56FB7489.2080304@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56FB73E0.7060601@redhat.com>
On 03/30/2016 02:36 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 30/03/2016 03:56, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>> x86/access.flat is currently using the "other" definition, i.e., PFEC.PK
>>> is only set if W=1 or CR0.WP=0 && PFEC.U=0 or PFEC.W=0. Can you use it
>>> (with ept=1 of course) to check what the processor is doing?
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>> And ept=1 is hard to trigger MMU issue, i am enabling PKEY on shadow
>> MMU, let's see what will happen. ;)
>
> No, don't do that!
>
> ept=1 lets you test what the processor does. It means you cannot test
> permission_fault(), but what we want here is just reverse engineering
> the microcode. ept=1 lets you do exactly that.
Yes, i got this point. Huaitong will do the test once the machine gets
free.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-30 6:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-25 13:19 [PATCH 1/4] KVM: MMU: fix permission_fault() Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-25 13:19 ` [PATCH 2/4] KVM: MMU: simplify the logic of __mmu_unsync_walk() Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-25 13:19 ` [PATCH 3/4] KVM: MMU: reduce the size of mmu_page_path Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-25 13:45 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-25 13:48 ` Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-25 13:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-25 14:07 ` Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-25 14:22 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-25 13:19 ` [PATCH 4/4] KVM: MMU: skip obsolete sp in for_each_gfn_*() Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-29 9:44 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-25 13:35 ` [PATCH 1/4] KVM: MMU: fix permission_fault() Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-25 13:41 ` Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-25 13:50 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-25 14:21 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-29 17:43 ` Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-29 20:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-30 1:56 ` Xiao Guangrong
2016-03-30 6:36 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-03-30 6:39 ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
2016-04-06 3:27 ` Xiao Guangrong
2016-04-06 8:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-04-06 8:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
2016-04-06 15:09 ` Xiao Guangrong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56FB7489.2080304@linux.intel.com \
--to=guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=huaitong.han@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.