* Jan Kiszka <[email protected]> [2017-11-02 07:51:11 +0100]:

[...]

> >>>   },
> >>>  };
> >>>  
> >>> -- 
> >>> 2.13.5
> >>
> >> Bump? Has anyone had the change to help test this now?
> >>
> >> Thanks a lot.
> >>
> > 
> > Not yet, it's on my todo list.
> > 
> > But I'm afraid we will hit further violations. In order to prepare for
> > them, I was considering some permissive mode, maybe build-time
> > configurable, that just reports violations but continues to perform the
> > access (except for those that we must handle in software). That would
> > help stabilizing this feature and later on tuning it.
> 
> I've started to look into this topic practically. I've added a
> permissive mode, fixed a larger set of violations as seen on a Xeon-D,
> removed unsafe and/or unneeded write permissions and also sorted out
> Intel-specific runtime filters into vmx.c. You can find the result in
> wip/msr-whitelist, along with a todo list.

Very nice, thanks. Will try and reserve some time back to this again.

> 
> Jan
> 
> -- 
> Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE
> Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Jailhouse" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
Gustavo Lima Chaves
Intel - Open Source Technology Center

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jailhouse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to