Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 3/4] vvmx: check the operand of L1 vmxon

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 18/12/16 14:02, Haozhong Zhang wrote:
> On 12/14/16 18:11 +0800, Haozhong Zhang wrote:
>> Check whether the operand of L1 vmxon is a valid VMXON region address
>> and whether the VMXON region at that address contains a valid revision
>> ID.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Haozhong Zhang <haozhong.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c
>> index e765b60..5523146 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vvmx.c
>> @@ -1383,6 +1383,7 @@ int nvmx_handle_vmxon(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>>     struct nestedvcpu *nvcpu = &vcpu_nestedhvm(v);
>>     struct vmx_inst_decoded decode;
>>     unsigned long gpa = 0;
>> +    uint32_t nvmcs_revid;
>>     int rc;
>>
>>     rc = decode_vmx_inst(regs, &decode, &gpa, 1);
>> @@ -1397,6 +1398,21 @@ int nvmx_handle_vmxon(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>>         return X86EMUL_OKAY;
>>     }
>>
>> +    if ( (gpa & ~PAGE_MASK) || (gpa >>
>> v->domain->arch.paging.gfn_bits) )
>                                                                 ^^^^^^^^
>
> I mistaken it as the number of valid bits of physical address and
> therefore missed adding PAGE_SHIFT here. The correct patch should be
> the one attached. I notice the wrong patch has been in the staging
> branch, so should I send a patch(set) to fix my mistake on the staging
> branch?

Yes please.  All new code gets committed into staging.

master is fast-forwarded into staging when OSSTest is happy that no
regressions have occurred.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel