Il 29/08/2014 02:13, Andy Lutomirski ha scritto:
Hmm. Then, assuming that someone manages to allocate a
cross-hypervisor MSR number for this, what am I supposed to do in the
KVM code? Just make it available unconditionally? I don't see why
that wouldn't work reliably, but it seems like an
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:58:34PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
hpa pointed out that the ABI that I chose (an MSR from the KVM range
and a KVM cpuid bit) is unnecessarily KVM-specific. It would be nice
to allocate an MSR that everyone involved can agree on and, rather
than relying on a cpuid
On Aug 28, 2014 7:17 AM, Gleb Natapov g...@kernel.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:58:34PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
hpa pointed out that the ABI that I chose (an MSR from the KVM range
and a KVM cpuid bit) is unnecessarily KVM-specific. It would be nice
to allocate an MSR that
Il 28/08/2014 18:22, Andy Lutomirski ha scritto:
Is there a non-cpuid interface between QEMU and KVM for this?
No.
AFAICT, even turning off cpuid bits for things like async pf doesn't
actually disable the MSRs (which is arguably an attack surface issue).
No, it doesn't. You cannot disable
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 28/08/2014 18:22, Andy Lutomirski ha scritto:
Is there a non-cpuid interface between QEMU and KVM for this?
No.
Hmm. Then, assuming that someone manages to allocate a
cross-hypervisor MSR number for this, what am I
Il 27/08/2014 01:58, Andy Lutomirski ha scritto:
hpa pointed out that the ABI that I chose (an MSR from the KVM range
and a KVM cpuid bit) is unnecessarily KVM-specific. It would be nice
to allocate an MSR that everyone involved can agree on and, rather
than relying on a cpuid bit, just have
On 08/27/2014 12:00 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 27/08/2014 01:58, Andy Lutomirski ha scritto:
hpa pointed out that the ABI that I chose (an MSR from the KVM range
and a KVM cpuid bit) is unnecessarily KVM-specific. It would be nice
to allocate an MSR that everyone involved can agree on and,
hpa pointed out that the ABI that I chose (an MSR from the KVM range
and a KVM cpuid bit) is unnecessarily KVM-specific. It would be nice
to allocate an MSR that everyone involved can agree on and, rather
than relying on a cpuid bit, just have the guest probe for the MSR.
This leads to a few
