Am Montag, 14. Juli 2008 schrieb Avi Kivity: > Certainly. I suggest exposing this via a KVM_CAP_blah and adapting at > runtime. > > Placing the guest at offset zero is dangerous, since all a guest has to > do is place a function at guest physical address zero and wait for a > kernel bug that calls a null function pointer (at least, it would behave > like that on x86, provided no-execute was disabled; it may well be that > s390 has additional protection).
Since we have separate address space for kernel and userspace this should be fine for s390. But I totally agree that offset != 0 is better for quality and testing. During KVM Forum time frame I found some null pointer accesses in our userspace code when I changed offset to 1MB. In the long term we definitely want to move our guest. Christian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
