|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/xsaves: get_xsave_addr needs check the xsave header
On 18/12/15 10:50, Huaitong Han wrote:
> The check needs to be against the xsave header in the area, rather than
> Xen's maximum xfeature_mask. A guest might easily have a smaller xcr0
> than the maximum Xen is willing to allow, causing the pointer below to
> be bogus.
>
> Signed-off-by: Huaitong Han <huaitong.han@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> xen/arch/x86/xstate.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/xstate.c b/xen/arch/x86/xstate.c
> index b65da38..d87ab40 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/xstate.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xstate.c
> @@ -146,12 +146,13 @@ static void __init setup_xstate_comp(void)
> }
> }
>
> -static void *get_xsave_addr(void *xsave, unsigned int xfeature_idx)
> +static void *get_xsave_addr(struct xsave_struct *xsave,
> + unsigned int xfeature_idx)
> {
> - if ( !((1ul << xfeature_idx) & xfeature_mask) )
> + if ( !((1ul << xfeature_idx) & xsave->xsave_hdr.xstate_bv) )
> return NULL;
>
> - return xsave + xstate_comp_offsets[xfeature_idx];
> + return (void *)xsave + xstate_comp_offsets[xfeature_idx];
This indeed fixes one of the issues. However, you must also check
xcomb_bv & XSTATE_COMPACTION_ENABLED before using xstate_comp_offsets.
I think you should end up with something like:
if ( xsave->xsave_hdr.xcomb_bv & XSTATE_COMPACTION_ENABLED )
return (void *)xsave + xstate_comp_offsets[xfeature_idx];
else
return (void *)xsave + xstate_offsets[xfeature_idx];
which allows get_xsave_addr() to work on both compressed and
uncompressed xstate areas.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |