From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: kvm's vapic Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 18:27:44 +0200 Message-ID: <4F257380.1030108@redhat.com> References: <4F2567AE.8000509@web.de> <4F256AF2.1090106@redhat.com> <4F256B4D.4080501@redhat.com> <4F256BF2.1010906@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , Gleb Natapov , kvm To: Jan Kiszka Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22279 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753071Ab2A2Q1r (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jan 2012 11:27:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4F256BF2.1010906@web.de> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/29/2012 05:55 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-01-29 16:52, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 01/29/2012 05:51 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > >>> Already the assumption that we find a CPU index at > >>> fs:0x51 is apparently hard-coding this. Or that kernel code is at > >>> 0x8xxxxxxx or 0xExxxxxxx. > >>> > >>> But what makes sure that we aren't patching some other obscure OS that > >>> doesn't comply with our assumptions but triggers the TPR access reports > >>> nevertheless? > >> > >> Not much, but we've never had an issue. > > > > Checking that the bios is mapped at 0x[8e]0000000 + phys should filter > > out most non-Windows OSes. > > Possibly. > > What about that major/minor version entries in the KPCR? Do they work, > and do we have a list of what should be there? We don't. But things like the IDT/GTD/TSS and especially SelfPcr look like good candidates. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function