[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2] x86/nSVM: Check the L1 IOPM_BASE and MSRPM_BASE assigned physical addresses
- To: Abdelkareem Abdelsaamad <abdelkareem.abdelsaamad@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 12:36:12 +0200
- Authentication-results: eu.smtp.expurgate.cloud; dkim=pass header.s=google header.d=suse.com header.i="@suse.com" header.h="Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:Autocrypt:From:Content-Language:References:Cc:To:Subject:User-Agent:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID"
- Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
- Cc: andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx, jason.andryuk@xxxxxxx, teddy.astie@xxxxxxxxxx, Roger Pau Monné <roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Wed, 05 Aug 2026 10:36:22 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 29.07.2026 16:38, Abdelkareem Abdelsaamad wrote:
> @@ -294,6 +296,24 @@ static int nsvm_vmrun_permissionmap(struct vcpu *v, bool
> viopm)
> enum hvm_translation_result ret;
> unsigned long *ns_viomap;
> bool ioport_80 = true, ioport_ed = true;
> + gfn_t ns_iopm_end =
> + gfn_add(gaddr_to_gfn(ns_vmcb->_iopm_base_pa), (IOPM_PAGES_COUNT -
> 1));
> + gfn_t ns_msrpm_end =
> + gfn_add(gaddr_to_gfn(ns_vmcb->_msrpm_base_pa), (MSRPM_PAGES_COUNT -
> 1));
Nit: Why the excess parentheses around the 2nd arguments each? Without them
the 2nd instance also more obviously stays within line length limits.
> + if ( gfn_x(ns_iopm_end) > domain_get_maximum_gpfn(v->domain) )
I don't think using domain_get_maximum_gpfn() is correct here. Imo you want
to merely check against what the guest is told in CPUID. Everything else
ought to be properly covered by hvm_copy_from_guest_phys() /
hvm_map_guest_frame_ro() already. In fact for the MSR bitmap I thus can't
see why further checking would be needed. And for the I/O bitmap it looks
to be a matter of better error handling, rather than introducing extra
checking.
> + {
> + gdprintk(XENLOG_ERR, "%s invalid _iopm_base_pa address
> (%#"PRIx64")\n",
> + __func__, ns_vmcb->_iopm_base_pa);
> + return 1;
Why literal 1? Yes, there is another such return in the function, but no, we
don't want to extend that. Aiui NSVM_ERROR_VVMCB is meant here.
Jan
|
