On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 16:58 -0700, Dor Laor wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/kvm/svm.c b/drivers/kvm/svm.c
> index cc674bf..9bfd11e 100644
> --- a/drivers/kvm/svm.c
> +++ b/drivers/kvm/svm.c
> @@ -1022,6 +1022,11 @@ static int halt_interception(struct vcpu_svm
> *svm, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
>
> static int vmmcall_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm, struct kvm_run
> *kvm_run)
> {
> + if (svm->vmcb->save.cpl != 0) {
> + inject_ud(&svm->vcpu);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> svm->next_rip = svm->vmcb->save.rip + 3;
> skip_emulated_instruction(&svm->vcpu);
> return kvm_hypercall(&svm->vcpu, kvm_run);
Can you split this out and submit the patch separately. This is
actually a pretty nasty bug as SVM doesn't check for CPL=0 in hardware.
This patch is independent of your series.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
> -----
> In simplicity there is elegance.
> Dor Laor ;)
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
> Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
> Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
> Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
> _______________________________________________
> kvm-devel mailing list
> kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
