Add a "umip" test for the User-Model Instruction Prevention. The test
simply tries to run sgdt/sidt/sldt/str/smsw in guest user-mode with
CR4_UMIP = 1.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng (Intel)
---
v1 --> v2:
* add a new write_cr4_safe()
* use %pe for exception print
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:35:47AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 14/08/17 06:08, Boqun Feng (Intel) wrote:
> > Add a "umip" test for the User-Model Instruction Prevention. The test
> > simply tries to run sgdt/sidt/sldt/str/smsw in guest user-mode with
> > CR4_
Add a "umip" test for the User-Model Instruction Prevention. The test
simply tries to run sgdt/sidt/sldt/str/smsw in guest user-mode with
CR4_UMIP = 1.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng (Intel)
---
v1 --> v2:
* add a new write_cr4_safe()
* use %pe for exception print
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:38:59AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 20/07/17 06:29, Boqun Feng (Intel) wrote:
> > Add a "umip" test for the User-Model Instruction Prevention. The test
> > simply tries to run sgdt/sidt/sldt/str/smsw in guest user-mode with
> > CR4_U
Add a "umip" test for the User-Model Instruction Prevention. The test
simply tries to run sgdt/sidt/sldt/str/smsw in guest user-mode with
CR4_UMIP = 1.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng (Intel)
---
docs/all-tests.dox | 2 +
tests/umip/Makefile | 9
tests/umip/main
ion exception (#GP).
This patch simply adds necessary definitions to expose this feature to
hvm guests.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng (Intel)
Cc: Jan Beulich
---
This patch is basically based on Jan Beulich's patch:
https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-12/msg00552
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:29:21PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 02:33:40PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Linus Torvalds
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > You might as well just write it as
> > >
> > > struct foo x = READ_ONCE(*ptr);
> > >
Hi Paul,
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 07:46:29AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 04:19:29PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > You could use SYNC_ACQUIRE() to implement read_barrier_depends() and
> > > smp_read_barrier_depends(), but SYNC_RMB prob
Hi Will,
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:16:09PM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:03:22PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > PPC Overlapping
elease().
> >
> >
> > But I think removing smp_lwsync() is a good idea and actually I think we
> > can go further to remove __smp_lwsync() and let __smp_load_acquire and
> > __smp_store_release call __lwsync() directly, but that is another thing.
> >
> > Anyway, I will
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 06:16:48PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
[snip]
> > > > Another thing is that smp_lwsync() may have a third user(other than
> > > > smp_load_acquire() and smp_store_release()):
> > > >
> > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded/89877
> > > >
> > > >
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:51:17AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 09:36:55AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:07:42PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > This defines __smp_xxx barrier
Hi Michael,
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:07:42PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> This defines __smp_xxx barriers for powerpc
> for use by virtualization.
>
> smp_xxx barriers are removed as they are
> defined correctly by asm-generic/barriers.h
>
> This reduces the amount of arch-specific boile
13 matches
Mail list logo
