qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [qemu-web PATCH] Add a blog post documenting Spectre/Me


From: Daniel P . Berrangé
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [qemu-web PATCH] Add a blog post documenting Spectre/Meltdown options for QEMU 2.11.1
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:51:48 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 06:11:05PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote:
> This blog entry is intended as a follow-up to the original entry in
> January regarding Spectre/Meltdown and the proposed changes to address
> them in the upcoming 2.11.1 release.
> 
> This entry is meant to accompany the 2.11.1 release (planned for
> 2018-02-14) and document how to make use of the new options for
> various architectures.
> 
> Cc: Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
> Cc: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
> Cc: Suraj Jitindar Singh <address@hidden>
> Cc: David Gibson <address@hidden>
> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden>
> Cc: Cornelia Huck <address@hidden>
> Cc: Thomas Huth <address@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Roth <address@hidden>
> ---
> 
> The pseries/s390 bits have gotten some initial review (thanks 
> Suraj/Christian),
> but it can definitely use some additional review on the x86 side of things.
> 
> Also, Peter if think anything extra should to be mentioned on the ARM side 
> just
> let me know what to add.
> 
>  .../2018-02-14-qemu-2-11-1-and-spectre-update.md   | 180 
> +++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 180 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 _posts/2018-02-14-qemu-2-11-1-and-spectre-update.md
> 
> diff --git a/_posts/2018-02-14-qemu-2-11-1-and-spectre-update.md 
> b/_posts/2018-02-14-qemu-2-11-1-and-spectre-update.md
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..7cdea59
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/_posts/2018-02-14-qemu-2-11-1-and-spectre-update.md
> @@ -0,0 +1,180 @@

> +Please note that, as mentioned in the previous blog post, QEMU/KVM generally
> +has the same requirements as other unpriviledged processes running on the
> +host WRT Spectre/Meltdown mitigation.

Is this actually still considered accurate wrt the host QEMU ? I was under
the believe that life is more complicated for QEMU/KVM wrt Spectre and that
it will require more protection than other unpriv processes on the host in
some cases.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]