On 23/01/18 09:40, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 23.01.18 at 06:50, <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 22/01/18 17:51, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> But isn't that model having the same synchronization issues upon >>> guest L4 updates which Andrew was fighting with? >> >> I don't think so, as the number of shadows will always only be max. 1 >> with my approach. > > How can I know that? The overview mail doesn't talk about the > intended shadowing algorithm afaics, and none of the patches > (judging by their titles) implements any part thereof. In
Right. That's the reason I'm telling you about it. > particular I'd be curious to know whether what you say will > hold also for guests not making use of the intended PV ABI > extension. Those guests will still be vulnerable to cross-vcpu accesses to Xen stacks regarding Meltdown. Linux kernel is vulnerable the same way regarding its own stacks, so there is no new vulnerability added for Linux running as pv guests (I have to admit I don't know whether the same applies to BSD). Juergen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
