Re: Standardizing an MSR or other hypercall to get an RNG seed?

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

 



On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Nakajima, Jun <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> So, as a concrete straw-man:
>>>
>>> CPUID leaf 0x48000000 would return a maximum leaf number in EAX (e.g.
>>> 0x48000001) along with a signature value (e.g. "CrossHVPara\0") in
>>> EBX, ECX, and EDX.
>>>
>>> CPUID 0x48000001.EAX would contain an MSR number to read to get a
>>> random number if supported and zero if not supported.
>>>
>>> Questions:
>>>
>>> 1. Can we use a fixed MSR number?  This would be a little bit simpler,
>>> but it would depend on getting a wider MSR range from Intel.
>>>
>>
>> Why do you need a wider MSR range if you always detect the feature by
>> CPUID.0x48000001?
>> Or are you still trying to avoid the detection by CPUID?
>
> Detecting the feature is one thing, but figuring out the MSR index is
> another.  We could shove the index into the cpuid leaf, but that seems
> unnecessarily indirect.  I'd much rather just say that CPUID leaves
> *and* MSR indexes 0x48000000-0x4800ffff or so are reserved for the
> cross-HV mechanism, but we can't do that without either knowingly
> violating the SDM assignments or asking Intel to consider allocating
> more MSR indexes.
>
> Also, KVM is already conflicting with the SDM right now in its MSR
> choice :(  I *think* that KVM could be changed to fix that, but 256
> MSRs is rather confining given that KVM currently implements its own
> MSR index *and* part of the Hyper-V index.

Correction and update:

KVM currently implements its own MSRs and, optionally, some of the
Hyper-V MSRs.  By my count, Linux knows about 68 Hyper-V MSRs (in a
header file), and there are current 7 KVM MSRs, so over 1/4 of the
available MSR indices are taken (and even more would be taken if KVM
were to move its MSRs into the correct range).

--Andy
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization




[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux