Re: [RFC PATCH v6 70/92] kvm: x86: filter out access rights only when tracked by the introspection tool

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

 



On 09/08/19 18:00, Adalbert Lazăr wrote:
> It should complete the commit fd34a9518173 ("kvm: x86: consult the page tracking from kvm_mmu_get_page() and __direct_map()")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adalbert Lazăr <alazar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> index 65b6acba82da..fd64cf1115da 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> @@ -2660,6 +2660,9 @@ static void clear_sp_write_flooding_count(u64 *spte)
>  static unsigned int kvm_mmu_page_track_acc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn,
>  					   unsigned int acc)
>  {
> +	if (!kvmi_tracked_gfn(vcpu, gfn))
> +		return acc;
> +
>  	if (kvm_page_track_is_active(vcpu, gfn, KVM_PAGE_TRACK_PREREAD))
>  		acc &= ~ACC_USER_MASK;
>  	if (kvm_page_track_is_active(vcpu, gfn, KVM_PAGE_TRACK_PREWRITE) ||
> 

If this patch is always needed, then the function should be named
something like kvm_mmu_apply_introspection_access and kvmi_tracked_gfn
should be tested from the moment it is introduced.

But the commit message says nothing about _why_ it is needed, so I
cannot guess.  I would very much avoid it however.  Is it just an
optimization?

Paolo
_______________________________________________
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