mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
To: "seanjc@google.com" <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"hao.p.peng@linux.intel.com" <hao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/mmu: x86: Don't overflow lpage_info when checking attributes
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 21:23:02 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <367025810d9a12af90ed3a5c6f49b0dfe9997adc.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZfIWnykN1XG-8TlC@google.com>

On Wed, 2024-03-13 at 14:11 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> I wouldn't prioritize speed, I would prioritize overall complexity. 
> And my gut
> reaction is that the overall complexity would go up because we'd need
> to make
> multiple paths aware that lpage_info could be NULL.  There are other
> side effects
> to making something conditionally valid too, e.g. in the unlikely
> scenario where
> we mucked up the allocation, KVM would silently fall back to 4KiB
> mappings, versus
> today KVM would explode (bad for production, but good for
> development).

Fair enough, I won't hurry up and try. I'm not sure there would be too
many places that would have to handle the out-of-bounds case once
everything was suitable wrapped up, though.

      reply	other threads:[~2024-03-13 21:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-12 17:33 Rick Edgecombe
2024-03-13  9:49 ` Dongli Zhang
2024-03-13 16:25   ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-03-13 21:27     ` Dongli Zhang
2024-03-13 19:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-03-13 20:17   ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-03-13 21:11     ` Sean Christopherson
2024-03-13 21:23       ` Edgecombe, Rick P [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=367025810d9a12af90ed3a5c6f49b0dfe9997adc.camel@intel.com \
    --to=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=hao.p.peng@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=isaku.yamahata@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®