From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Asdo Subject: Re: Doubt on KVM-88 vulnerabilities Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:05:28 +0100 Message-ID: <4AF98138.6000100@shiftmail.org> References: <20091108184240.GA29279@defiant.freesoftware> <4AF93AB8.3040504@redhat.com> <4AF94A2A.2020302@shiftmail.org> <4AF95690.1050208@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <4AF97689.1070503@shiftmail.org> <4AF97BEB.8020406@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Tokarev Return-path: Received: from mx2.isti.cnr.it ([194.119.192.4]:2743 "EHLO mx2.isti.cnr.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756631AbZKJPGD (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:06:03 -0500 Received: from conversionlocal.isti.cnr.it by mx.isti.cnr.it (PMDF V6.4 #31773) id <01NFXM0NU1EO8Y8Q5F@mx.isti.cnr.it> for kvm@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:05:24 +0100 In-reply-to: <4AF97BEB.8020406@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Great, thanks for your reply! All clear, except one thing, pls see ---> Michael Tokarev wrote: >> >> 2.6.31.5 >> 2.6.30 >> 2.6.30.1 >> 2.6.30-rc8 >> 2.6.30-rc6 >> >> I don't undestand why they are numbered like the kernel, that's >> strange... More specifically, this is the question: If I have a >> kernel version N, what kvm-kmod can I compile in it? If I can just >> compile version N, then it's useless because that's identical to the >> kvm.ko I already had. Or can I compile kvm-kmod 2.6.31.5 in my kernel >> 2.6.24? That's a strange version numbering... why haven't you used >> the same numbering as for qemu-kvm? > And besides, the versioning of kvm-kmod's are not obvious to me: I see > these ones at sourceforge: > > Because such numbering proved to be confusing, and you are confused by > it too. The above numbers means just like, kvm-kmod from kernel 2.6.30.1 > (say), but "ported" to a wider range of kernels. kvm-kmod is being > developed as part of kernel. Ok so you mean I can indeed take kvm-kmod 2.6.31.5 and compile it against my older host kernel? (except that the host kernel needs to be anyway >= 2.6.28 as you say below) Did I understand correctly? > Btw, 2.6.24 and in fact anything before ~2.6.28 might be problematic for > real kvm usage, due to other parts of the kernel. Applies to both > host and guest kernels. Thank you Asdo