From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEB3AC433DF for ; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:28:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D4E32065F for ; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:28:27 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7D4E32065F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=citrix.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jc7iQ-0004mI-6U; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:27:58 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jc7iP-0004mD-PH for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:27:57 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 0c3298d4-9c30-11ea-b9cf-bc764e2007e4 Received: from ppsw-31.csi.cam.ac.uk (unknown [131.111.8.131]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 0c3298d4-9c30-11ea-b9cf-bc764e2007e4; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:27:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus Received: from 88-109-182-220.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com ([88.109.182.220]:43970 helo=[192.168.1.219]) by ppsw-31.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.157]:465) with esmtpsa (PLAIN:amc96) (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) id 1jc7iM-000sCb-M2 (Exim 4.92.3) (return-path ); Fri, 22 May 2020 14:27:54 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] x86: relax GDT check in arch_set_info_guest() To: Jan Beulich , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" References: From: Andrew Cooper Message-ID: <58510f15-68d6-c773-5166-a38c72573442@citrix.com> Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 14:27:54 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-GB X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Wei Liu , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On 20/05/2020 08:53, Jan Beulich wrote: > It is wrong for us to check frames beyond the guest specified limit > (in the compat case another loop bound is already correct). > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich I'm still not overly convinced this is a good idea, because all it will allow people to do is write lazy code which breaks on older Xen. However, if you still insist, Acked-by: Andrew Cooper