Re: [Patch v4 2/4] Add SMEP handling when setting CR4

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/01/2011 03:32 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:03:26PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>  On 05/31/2011 09:48 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>  >On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 09:05:35PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>  >>   >>     	if (is_long_mode(vcpu)) {
>  >>   >>     		if (!(cr4&    X86_CR4_PAE))
>  >>   >>     			return 1;
>  >>   >
>  >>   >A new field in vcpu->arch.mmu.base_role for smep is required
>  >>   >for shadow MMU (similar to nxe).
>  >>
>  >>   I plan to add that with my cr0.wp=0 fixup (it's only needed there, right?)
>  >
>  >Sptes instantiated when cr4.smep = 0 should not be used when cr4.smep =
>  >1, so no (unlikely that guest kernel executes user=1 code anyway, but
>  >for consistency with other base_role flags).
>
>  Why not?  The sptes are interpreted exactly the same.
>
>  sptes are interpreted differently when efer.nxe=1 - if bit 63 is
>  set, it will fault when nxe=0 and will not fault when nxe=1 (for
>  non-fetch accesses).  So we can't share those sptes.

A) CR4.SMEP = 0, spte instantiated via fetch fault of user pte.
B) CR4.SMEP = 1, base_role unchanged.
C) spte instantiated in A) used, but access should fault instead.

Or if you have multiple CPUs with different settings.

Why would C) not fault? The spte has U=1, any fetch access from kernel mode with SMEP=1 will fault.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux