Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] x86/shadow: Correct guest behaviour when creating PTEs above maxphysaddr

2017-02-20 Thread Tim Deegan
At 15:45 + on 16 Feb (1487259954), Andrew Cooper wrote: > XSA-173 (c/s 8b1764833) introduces gfn_bits, and an upper limit which might be > lower than the real maxphysaddr, to avoid overflowing the superpage shadow > backpointer. > > However, plenty of hardware has a physical address width

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] x86/shadow: Correct guest behaviour when creating PTEs above maxphysaddr

2017-02-16 Thread Tian, Kevin
> From: Andrew Cooper [mailto:andrew.coop...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 11:46 PM > > XSA-173 (c/s 8b1764833) introduces gfn_bits, and an upper limit which might be > lower than the real maxphysaddr, to avoid overflowing the superpage shadow > backpointer. > > However, plenty

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] x86/shadow: Correct guest behaviour when creating PTEs above maxphysaddr

2017-02-16 Thread George Dunlap
On 16/02/17 15:45, Andrew Cooper wrote: > XSA-173 (c/s 8b1764833) introduces gfn_bits, and an upper limit which might be > lower than the real maxphysaddr, to avoid overflowing the superpage shadow > backpointer. > > However, plenty of hardware has a physical address width less that 44 bits, >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] x86/shadow: Correct guest behaviour when creating PTEs above maxphysaddr

2017-02-16 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 16.02.17 at 16:45, wrote: > XSA-173 (c/s 8b1764833) introduces gfn_bits, and an upper limit which might be > lower than the real maxphysaddr, to avoid overflowing the superpage shadow > backpointer. > > However, plenty of hardware has a physical address width