[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CMOS file support

2010-09-16 Thread Mathias Krause
S RAM. Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause --- hw/mc146818rtc.c | 62 - 1 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/hw/mc146818rtc.c b/hw/mc146818rtc.c index 2b91fa8..9f215e0 100644 --- a/hw/mc146818rtc.c +++ b/hw/mc146818

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CMOS file support

2010-09-16 Thread Mathias Krause
Am 16.09.2010 18:49, Stefan Weil schrieb: > The intention of this patch is ok. Loading CMOS with initial data > is needed. I just want to add two questions / remarks how the > implementation might be improved. > > Are there use cases where having a smaller CMOS size is better? > For example, when

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CMOS file support

2010-09-16 Thread Mathias Krause
Am 16.09.2010 19:20 schrieb Anthony Liguori: > Instead of using FILE, I'd suggest using a BlockDriver to read and write > the data. I'll fix that as soon as I figured how to use this interface. > I think it would be very nice to add write support too so that writes to > CMOS were persisted across

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CMOS file support

2010-09-17 Thread Mathias Krause
On 17.09.2010 12:58, Stefan Weil wrote: > Am 17.09.2010 08:42, schrieb Mathias Krause: >> Am 16.09.2010 18:49, Stefan Weil schrieb: >>> Are there use cases where having a smaller CMOS size is better? >>> For example, when I want to emulate a system with 128 byte CMOS? &g

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CMOS file support

2010-09-17 Thread Mathias Krause
Hi Kevin, On 17.09.2010 12:44, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Hi Mathias, > > Am 17.09.2010 08:42, schrieb Mathias Krause: >>> Using QEMU's block devices instead of a simple file would be >>> more consistent with the rest of QEMU and allow reading the >>> CMOS data

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CMOS file support

2010-09-22 Thread Mathias Krause
On 17.09.2010 15:27, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 09/17/2010 01:50 AM, Mathias Krause wrote: >> Am 16.09.2010 19:20 schrieb Anthony Liguori: >> >>> Instead of using FILE, I'd suggest using a BlockDriver to read and write >>> the data. >>> &

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] CMOS file support

2010-09-26 Thread Mathias Krause
On 24.09.2010 14:47, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Mathias Krause writes: > >> On 17.09.2010 15:27, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> On 09/17/2010 01:50 AM, Mathias Krause wrote: >>>> Am 16.09.2010 19:20 schrieb Anthony Liguori: >>>> >>>>> In

Re: [PATCH qemu v3] x86: don't let decompressed kernel image clobber setup_data

2023-01-10 Thread Mathias Krause
the QEMU command line made the bug vanish (as QEMU then omits adding the random seed setup_data entries) . [1] https://github.com/qemu/qemu/commit/67f7e426e538 After digging a while I found this thread and it fixes the issue for me, thereby: Tested-by: Mathias Krause Thanks, Mathias > [snip]

[PATCH] i386/kvm: Disable hypercall patching quirk by default

2025-06-19 Thread Mathias Krause
20316005538.2282772-2-oup...@google.com/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/80e1f1d2-2d79-22b7-6665-c00e4fe9c...@redhat.com/ Cc: Oliver Upton Cc: Sean Christopherson Cc: Paolo Bonzini Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause --- include/system/kvm_int.h | 1 + qemu-options.hx | 10 ++ targ

[PATCH] target/i386: Fix CR2 handling for non-canonical addresses

2025-06-12 Thread Mathias Krause
el.org/kvm/20250612141637.131314-1-mini...@grsecurity.net/ Fixes: 3563362ddfae ("target/i386: Introduce structures for mmu_translate") Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause --- target/i386/tcg/system/excp_helper.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/ta

Re: [PATCH] target/i386: Fix CR2 handling for non-canonical addresses

2025-07-21 Thread Mathias Krause
On 12.06.25 16:21, Mathias Krause wrote: > Commit 3563362ddfae ("target/i386: Introduce structures for mmu_translate") > accidentally modified CR2 for non-canonical address exceptions while these > should lead to a #GP / #SS instead -- without changing CR2. > > Fix that.

Re: [PATCH] i386/kvm: Disable hypercall patching quirk by default

2025-07-21 Thread Mathias Krause
On 19.06.25 21:42, Mathias Krause wrote: > KVM has a weird behaviour when a guest executes VMCALL on an AMD system > or VMMCALL on an Intel CPU. Both naturally generate an invalid opcode > exception (#UD) as they are just the wrong instruction for the CPU > given. But instead of fo

Re: [PATCH] i386/kvm: Disable hypercall patching quirk by default

2025-07-22 Thread Mathias Krause
On 22.07.25 05:45, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 6/20/2025 3:42 AM, Mathias Krause wrote: >> KVM has a weird behaviour when a guest executes VMCALL on an AMD system >> or VMMCALL on an Intel CPU. Both naturally generate an invalid opcode >> exception (#UD) as they are just the wron

Re: [PATCH v2] i386/kvm: Disable hypercall patching quirk by default

2025-07-23 Thread Mathias Krause
On 23.07.25 08:54, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 7/23/2025 4:43 AM, Mathias Krause wrote: >> KVM has a weird behaviour when a guest executes VMCALL on an AMD system >> or VMMCALL on an Intel CPU. Both naturally generate an invalid opcode >> exception (#UD) as they are just the wron

[PATCH v2] i386/kvm: Disable hypercall patching quirk by default

2025-07-22 Thread Mathias Krause
20316005538.2282772-2-oup...@google.com/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/80e1f1d2-2d79-22b7-6665-c00e4fe9c...@redhat.com/ Cc: Oliver Upton Cc: Sean Christopherson Cc: Paolo Bonzini Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause --- v2: - rename hypercall_patching_enabled to hypercall_patching (Xiaoyao Li)

Re: [PATCH] i386/kvm: Disable hypercall patching quirk by default

2025-07-22 Thread Mathias Krause
On 22.07.25 12:27, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 7/22/2025 5:21 PM, Mathias Krause wrote: >> IMHO, there is no valid reason for still having the patching in place as >> the .text of non-ancient kernel's  will be write-protected, making >> patching attempts fail. And, as they

Re: [PATCH] i386/kvm: Disable hypercall patching quirk by default

2025-07-22 Thread Mathias Krause
On 22.07.25 14:21, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 7/22/2025 7:15 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: >> [...] >> >> Usually CSPs don't have full control over what their customers >> are running as a guest. If their customers are running mainstream >> modern guest OS, CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX is pretty likely to

Re: [PATCH v2] i386/kvm: Disable hypercall patching quirk by default

2025-07-24 Thread Mathias Krause
On 23.07.25 10:50, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 7/23/2025 4:42 PM, Xiaoyao Li wrote: >> On 7/23/2025 3:53 PM, Mathias Krause wrote: >>> Bleh, I just noticed that there are KUT tests that actually rely on the >>> feature[1]. I'll fix these but, looks like, we need to defa

[PATCH v3] i386/kvm: Provide knob to disable hypercall patching quirk

2025-08-01 Thread Mathias Krause
ab.com/kvm-unit-tests/kvm-unit-tests/-/blob/f045ea5627a3/x86/apic.c#L644 [5] https://gitlab.com/kvm-unit-tests/kvm-unit-tests/-/blob/f045ea5627a3/x86/vmexit.c#L36 Cc: Oliver Upton Cc: Sean Christopherson Cc: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Xiaoyao Li Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause --- Xiaoyao, I left out your