Re: kvm's vapic

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 999 bytes --]

On 2012-01-29 17:27, Avi Kivity wrote:
> 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.
> 

So fs.base should be SelfPcr? Will check.

Jan


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]