From: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>,
George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/17] x86: split __{get,put}_user() into "guest" and "unsafe" variants
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:23:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YCKpC1IgLuscSFK3@Air-de-Roger> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e86040e7-0c16-00c8-9b01-eac9b928ddc2@suse.com>
On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 03:57:22PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> I did change the paragraph to read
>
> The "guest" variants are intended to work with (potentially) fully guest
> controlled addresses, while the "unsafe" variants are intended to be
> used in order to access addresses not (directly) under guest control,
> within Xen's part of virtual address space. (For linear page table and
> descriptor table accesses the low bits of the addresses may still be
> guest controlled, but this still won't allow speculation to "escape"
> into unwanted areas.) Subsequently we will want them to have distinct
> behavior, so as first step identify which one is which. For now, both
> groups of constructs alias one another.
>
> earlier today. Is this clear enough? Relevant parts I've also mirrored
> into patch 3's description?
Yes, that does indeed seem clearer, thanks.
Roger.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-09 15:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-14 15:01 [PATCH 00/17] x86/PV: avoid speculation abuse through guest accessors plus Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:03 ` [PATCH 01/17] x86/shadow: use __put_user() instead of __copy_to_user() Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH 02/17] x86: split __{get,put}_user() into "guest" and "unsafe" variants Jan Beulich
2021-02-05 15:43 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-05 16:13 ` Jan Beulich
2021-02-05 16:18 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-05 16:26 ` Jan Beulich
2021-02-09 13:07 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-09 13:15 ` Jan Beulich
2021-02-09 14:46 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-09 14:57 ` Jan Beulich
2021-02-09 15:23 ` Roger Pau Monné [this message]
2021-02-09 14:55 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-09 15:14 ` Jan Beulich
2021-02-09 15:27 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH 03/17] x86: split __copy_{from,to}_user() " Jan Beulich
2021-02-09 16:06 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-09 17:03 ` Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:04 ` [PATCH 04/17] x86/PV: harden guest memory accesses against speculative abuse Jan Beulich
2021-02-09 16:26 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-10 16:55 ` Jan Beulich
2021-02-11 8:11 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-11 11:28 ` Jan Beulich
2021-02-12 10:41 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-12 12:48 ` Jan Beulich
2021-02-12 13:02 ` Roger Pau Monné
2021-02-12 13:15 ` Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:05 ` [PATCH 05/17] x86: rename {get,put}_user() to {get,put}_guest() Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:05 ` [PATCH 06/17] x86/gdbsx: convert "user" to "guest" accesses Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:06 ` [PATCH 07/17] x86: rename copy_{from,to}_user() to copy_{from,to}_guest_pv() Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:07 ` [PATCH 08/17] x86: move stac()/clac() from {get,put}_unsafe_asm() Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:07 ` [PATCH 09/17] x86/PV: use get_unsafe() instead of copy_from_unsafe() Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:08 ` [PATCH 10/17] x86/shadow: " Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:08 ` [PATCH 11/17] x86/shadow: polish shadow_write_entries() Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:09 ` [PATCH 12/17] x86/shadow: move shadow_set_l<N>e() to their own source file Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:09 ` [PATCH 13/17] x86/shadow: don't open-code SHF_* shorthands Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:10 ` [PATCH 14/17] x86/shadow: SH_type_l2h_shadow is PV-only Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:10 ` [PATCH 15/17] x86/shadow: drop SH_type_l2h_pae_shadow Jan Beulich
2021-01-22 13:11 ` Tim Deegan
2021-01-22 16:31 ` Jan Beulich
2021-01-22 20:02 ` Tim Deegan
2021-01-25 11:09 ` Jan Beulich
2021-01-25 11:33 ` Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:10 ` [PATCH 16/17] x86/shadow: only 4-level guest code needs building when !HVM Jan Beulich
2021-01-14 15:11 ` [PATCH 17/17] x86/shadow: adjust is_pv_*() checks Jan Beulich
2021-01-22 13:18 ` [PATCH 00/17] x86/PV: avoid speculation abuse through guest accessors plus Tim Deegan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YCKpC1IgLuscSFK3@Air-de-Roger \
--to=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.