[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V5] x86/hvm: fix domain crash when CR3 has the noflush bit set
On 02/19/2018 10:53 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 19.02.18 at 09:48, <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 02/16/2018 01:17 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 16.02.18 at 11:22, <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> The emulation layers of Xen lack PCID support, and as we only offer >>>> PCID to HAP guests, all writes to CR3 are handled by hardware, >>>> except when introspection is involved. Consequently, trying to set >>>> CR3 when the noflush bit is set in hvm_set_cr3() leads to domain >>>> crashes. The workaround is to clear the noflush bit in >>>> hvm_set_cr3(). CR3 values in hvm_monitor_cr() are also sanitized. >>>> Additionally, a bool parameter now propagates to >>>> {svm,vmx}_update_guest_cr(), so that no flushes occur when >>>> the bit was set. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Reported-by: Bitweasil <bitweasil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Suggested-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Acked-by: Tamas K Lengyel <tamas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> >> >> Should I rebase this because of commit >> 24470b99c1671dca531c2cf5747eda2f8892ecbc? > > Well, if that change introduces some conflict with yours, then > generally the (obvious) answer is "yes". Considering that your > patch doesn't have all necessary acks yet, whether you wait > until you have those is up to you (as alternatively there may be > further requests for changes to make). Right, sorry for being ambiguous - definitely no conflicts, but I had assumed (wrongly, as it turns out) that applying it would now require human intervention. It doesn't. Sorry for the noise. Thanks, Razvan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |